Let me tell you something... Overclock is not worth anything... if you want to get higher benchmark score then OC is the answer but for the every day task... including gaming... Do not overclock....!!!!
Well my only suggestion is to stay away from Diamond-brand graphics cards if you go for a 2500k or 2600k (which are awesome). For some reason I have the worst luck, and bought the only 6970 that has driver issues with a P67 board. (Drivers work with the graphics card on other boards, and other graphics card drivers work on this P67 board). Hah.
Well that's fair enough. Taking a chip and running it stable at or under the rated voltage, with an increase in the clock speed, will most likely not decrease the lifespan of the processor (though if you take away power saving options it may). I agree with you there.
I do that with my i7 2600k (which I hate just because of the horrible motherboards there's lots more than SATA2 problems... damn PCI slot is buggy). Anyways, I run mine at 1.2v at 4.0GHz since at 3.4GHz the cpu is usually at 1.37v
@Y2KFreeYaa Ohhh! I wanted to buy that processor! I haven't decided on a motherboard yet though...let me know if you have any suggestions. I'm an underclocker/undervolter more than a overclocker (I'm into low noise PC's). 1.2v at 4ghz sounds like a good compromise between speed and heat.
Haven't done enough research at the moment to begin building a new pc, but I am hoping to build a hackintosh in first half of this year....hopefully.....
@gxtechnology I have mixed feelings about the socket. My first 1155 motherboard (Asus Pro) was defective and locked the multiplier (tech at NCIX looked at it and was perplexed). My second one (Gigabyte P67-UD4) is having issues communicating with my Diamond 6970 graphics card (they're both shoddy products). I get random lag spikes in sc2, and drivers are impossible to install on PCI-based devices on this motherboard (with BIOS updates, reformats, etc, framework installed, etc, no solution).
But as far as the processor goes, it's definitely the easiest processor to overclock that I've ever dealt with. I can run at 1.215v stable, but I bumped it up to 1.225v just to be careful (I exaggerated it's not quite at 1.2v for 4.0GHz). It runs very cool though. I can keep my computer entirely silent (fan controller on NZXT Phantom), so my h70 fans basically are pushing hardly any air, and the processor just doesn't really heat up. I'd recommend you wait to see if bulldozer is any good.
@Y2KFreeYaa Hehe...I'm in a situation where as long as I can get funds, I need to build it ASAP...it cannot wait...my current computer is SO SLOW. If I can though, I'll make a video of the new build and post it :)
@Y2KFreeYaa I disagree. I believe it is the extra heat that causes reduction in life of CPU (if that is even provable...is another topic for another day). And I know for a FACT that overclocking does not necessarily cause extra heat. Nor is it only in 'practical' scenarios that it causes extra heat.
If you had said more heat causes reduction in CPU life, I may be more tending to agree.
Overclocking will reduce CPU lifetime IMO if the type of overclocking you do causes extra heat.
Extra voltage will in fact reduce the lifetime of a chip.
Look at, for example, the SATA2 ports on the 1155 socket motherboards which were recalled. The reason they were recalled was that there was a voltage regulation issue (overvolting of the controller). When you run more voltage through silicon, that silicon will degrade. The more voltage you run through it, the faster it will degrade. That is factual and simple as that. If you wish to disagree with fact, then so be it.
@Y2KFreeYaa I do not disagree with extra voltage reducing cpu lifetime - it probably will most of the time. However, overclocking can be done without increasing voltage - sometimes with a REDUCTION in voltage (if the CPU has enough headroom). By reducing voltage and increasing clock speed, you can actually attain a higher clock with lower overall heat production (I've done it SEVERAL times, and measured my own temps too). This is why I say overclocking does not NECESSARILY reduce cpu life.
When you're causing the CPU to stress itself, it will decrease the life of the CPU. However, it may be minuscule (again, it may be unmeasurable). In some cases (not necessarily all cases), it can be quite measurable though.
@Y2KFreeYaa While I don't mind being told when I am wrong, would you care to be more specific? Or are you saying everything I said is completely wrong? I'm here to learn, too.
Overclocking does produce extra heat (in certain circumstances it is unmeasurable amounts, especially when you're not increasing your voltage). However in most practical scenarios, overclocking does create extra heat.
When it comes to the life of the CPU, overclocking as well reduces the life of the CPU. The reason for this is simple: The silicone and other parts within the CPU have a lifetime. When you're causing the CPU to stress itself
@UTubeLightBulb Not always. Like I said, heat generated can be summed up as the result of clockspeed and voltage. And since overclocking is described as an increase in clockspeed over the default, if there is enough headroom in the specific sample you are working with compared to its 'rated' speed, you can increase clockspeed while lowering voltage enough that the resulting heat output can actually be lower at a higher voltage.
If you do not change voltage, then you are right, it WILL be hotter
@transciouss Thanks for the constructive feedback. I did realize this as well when I watched it myself. Perhaps I can come up with something in future videos that may add to the 'interesting' factor.
There are many many physical aspects to GPU/CPUs when running and overclocked then meet the eye. Its always doable but there is usually a con to go with it, such as heat, instability,IC thermal/amperage demage, and power utilization.
Anytime you push a flip in a transistor based item, even one as complex at the core i7 you push a bridge to flip faster then it's designed to, forcing electrons though this way require supercooling for conductivity or sheer wattage. The wattage is mostly taken up as heat production in the process of junction/bridge overclocking The remainder of the power slips through the individual transistors at a faster rate do to the amperage applied behind them to force the faster speeds.
The CPU is essentially the same whether its 2.6 or 3 or even 3.3. The CPU itself is tested at many speeds before it is packaged in a CPU completely, This tests the ICs endurance After this is done the L1 L2 and shared L3 cache " LF for muilti core " are locked in their most compatible perspective clock speed for the fastest yet most stable performance. The product integrity between a CPU determines speed price and sub model of the category ' core i7 9__ " Bloomfield codename.
In a GPU class the same is also applied " Fermi " plays the part in the GTX 470 + and due to its quality it is assigned to a clockspeed and mode like the GTX 480. Same thing with older GPUs 8800 to 240 I believe where all designed on the Tesla code named GPU and the biggest change was the die size for each transistor in Microns, The smaller transistor size allows for higher speeds since your moving few electrons through a smaller gate heat is reduced and so is the need for power consumption.
Thanks making this video man I always wondered about some of these myths......so in theory I should have no problem overclocking my e8400 if I have plenty of airflow and a good cpu fan?
@BuckeyeSparky I don't know very much about the e8400, but if it has headroom to be overclocked, then it should overclock with sufficient cooling and raises in voltage (if needed). You should always go for the lowest voltage possible for the clock speed you desire, to create the least heat (and draw less power from the wall). There are many guides on how to overclock a cpu on the internet so just make sure you know how to reset the CMOS if you set a clock that won't boot etc. and you'll be OK!
Let me tell you something... Overclock is not worth anything... if you want to get higher benchmark score then OC is the answer but for the every day task... including gaming... Do not overclock....!!!!
elpelu123 1 month ago
Ah I see.
Well my only suggestion is to stay away from Diamond-brand graphics cards if you go for a 2500k or 2600k (which are awesome). For some reason I have the worst luck, and bought the only 6970 that has driver issues with a P67 board. (Drivers work with the graphics card on other boards, and other graphics card drivers work on this P67 board). Hah.
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
Well that's fair enough. Taking a chip and running it stable at or under the rated voltage, with an increase in the clock speed, will most likely not decrease the lifespan of the processor (though if you take away power saving options it may). I agree with you there.
I do that with my i7 2600k (which I hate just because of the horrible motherboards there's lots more than SATA2 problems... damn PCI slot is buggy). Anyways, I run mine at 1.2v at 4.0GHz since at 3.4GHz the cpu is usually at 1.37v
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
@Y2KFreeYaa Ohhh! I wanted to buy that processor! I haven't decided on a motherboard yet though...let me know if you have any suggestions. I'm an underclocker/undervolter more than a overclocker (I'm into low noise PC's). 1.2v at 4ghz sounds like a good compromise between speed and heat.
Haven't done enough research at the moment to begin building a new pc, but I am hoping to build a hackintosh in first half of this year....hopefully.....
gxtechnology 1 year ago
@gxtechnology I have mixed feelings about the socket. My first 1155 motherboard (Asus Pro) was defective and locked the multiplier (tech at NCIX looked at it and was perplexed). My second one (Gigabyte P67-UD4) is having issues communicating with my Diamond 6970 graphics card (they're both shoddy products). I get random lag spikes in sc2, and drivers are impossible to install on PCI-based devices on this motherboard (with BIOS updates, reformats, etc, framework installed, etc, no solution).
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
But as far as the processor goes, it's definitely the easiest processor to overclock that I've ever dealt with. I can run at 1.215v stable, but I bumped it up to 1.225v just to be careful (I exaggerated it's not quite at 1.2v for 4.0GHz). It runs very cool though. I can keep my computer entirely silent (fan controller on NZXT Phantom), so my h70 fans basically are pushing hardly any air, and the processor just doesn't really heat up. I'd recommend you wait to see if bulldozer is any good.
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
@Y2KFreeYaa Hehe...I'm in a situation where as long as I can get funds, I need to build it ASAP...it cannot wait...my current computer is SO SLOW. If I can though, I'll make a video of the new build and post it :)
Can't promise though.
gxtechnology 1 year ago
However, I see you go on to justify certain things. I really don't have the time or patience to listen to it all.
Though, it's just simply an untrue statement to say that it's a "myth" that overclocking reduces the life of the CPU, or doesn't cause extra heat.
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
@Y2KFreeYaa I disagree. I believe it is the extra heat that causes reduction in life of CPU (if that is even provable...is another topic for another day). And I know for a FACT that overclocking does not necessarily cause extra heat. Nor is it only in 'practical' scenarios that it causes extra heat.
If you had said more heat causes reduction in CPU life, I may be more tending to agree.
Overclocking will reduce CPU lifetime IMO if the type of overclocking you do causes extra heat.
gxtechnology 1 year ago
@Y2KFreeYaa
Extra voltage will in fact reduce the lifetime of a chip.
Look at, for example, the SATA2 ports on the 1155 socket motherboards which were recalled. The reason they were recalled was that there was a voltage regulation issue (overvolting of the controller). When you run more voltage through silicon, that silicon will degrade. The more voltage you run through it, the faster it will degrade. That is factual and simple as that. If you wish to disagree with fact, then so be it.
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
@Y2KFreeYaa I do not disagree with extra voltage reducing cpu lifetime - it probably will most of the time. However, overclocking can be done without increasing voltage - sometimes with a REDUCTION in voltage (if the CPU has enough headroom). By reducing voltage and increasing clock speed, you can actually attain a higher clock with lower overall heat production (I've done it SEVERAL times, and measured my own temps too). This is why I say overclocking does not NECESSARILY reduce cpu life.
gxtechnology 1 year ago
When you're causing the CPU to stress itself, it will decrease the life of the CPU. However, it may be minuscule (again, it may be unmeasurable). In some cases (not necessarily all cases), it can be quite measurable though.
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
dude great vid very clear and informative keep up the good work!!!
and good to know what you mentioned in this vid to.
xxxdroidmonkeyxxx 1 year ago
full of crap
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
@Y2KFreeYaa While I don't mind being told when I am wrong, would you care to be more specific? Or are you saying everything I said is completely wrong? I'm here to learn, too.
gxtechnology 1 year ago
@gxtechnology I was probably being a bit blunt.
Overclocking does produce extra heat (in certain circumstances it is unmeasurable amounts, especially when you're not increasing your voltage). However in most practical scenarios, overclocking does create extra heat.
When it comes to the life of the CPU, overclocking as well reduces the life of the CPU. The reason for this is simple: The silicone and other parts within the CPU have a lifetime. When you're causing the CPU to stress itself
Y2KFreeYaa 1 year ago
Well, it might not REDUCE your CPU's life, but it will DEFINITELY increase heat.
UTubeLightBulb 1 year ago
@UTubeLightBulb Not always. Like I said, heat generated can be summed up as the result of clockspeed and voltage. And since overclocking is described as an increase in clockspeed over the default, if there is enough headroom in the specific sample you are working with compared to its 'rated' speed, you can increase clockspeed while lowering voltage enough that the resulting heat output can actually be lower at a higher voltage.
If you do not change voltage, then you are right, it WILL be hotter
gxtechnology 1 year ago
Thanks dude.
Seraphim401 1 year ago
you're right but not very entertaining
transciouss 1 year ago
@transciouss Thanks for the constructive feedback. I did realize this as well when I watched it myself. Perhaps I can come up with something in future videos that may add to the 'interesting' factor.
gxtechnology 1 year ago
There are many many physical aspects to GPU/CPUs when running and overclocked then meet the eye. Its always doable but there is usually a con to go with it, such as heat, instability,IC thermal/amperage demage, and power utilization.
Zenodilodon 1 year ago
Anytime you push a flip in a transistor based item, even one as complex at the core i7 you push a bridge to flip faster then it's designed to, forcing electrons though this way require supercooling for conductivity or sheer wattage. The wattage is mostly taken up as heat production in the process of junction/bridge overclocking The remainder of the power slips through the individual transistors at a faster rate do to the amperage applied behind them to force the faster speeds.
Zenodilodon 1 year ago
The CPU is essentially the same whether its 2.6 or 3 or even 3.3. The CPU itself is tested at many speeds before it is packaged in a CPU completely, This tests the ICs endurance After this is done the L1 L2 and shared L3 cache " LF for muilti core " are locked in their most compatible perspective clock speed for the fastest yet most stable performance. The product integrity between a CPU determines speed price and sub model of the category ' core i7 9__ " Bloomfield codename.
Zenodilodon 1 year ago
In a GPU class the same is also applied " Fermi " plays the part in the GTX 470 + and due to its quality it is assigned to a clockspeed and mode like the GTX 480. Same thing with older GPUs 8800 to 240 I believe where all designed on the Tesla code named GPU and the biggest change was the die size for each transistor in Microns, The smaller transistor size allows for higher speeds since your moving few electrons through a smaller gate heat is reduced and so is the need for power consumption.
Zenodilodon 1 year ago
@Zenodilodon Thank you for all the comments and explanations!
gxtechnology 1 year ago
@gxtechnology Not a problem, sorry if it all came off as a tad harsh though.
Zenodilodon 1 year ago
Thanks making this video man I always wondered about some of these myths......so in theory I should have no problem overclocking my e8400 if I have plenty of airflow and a good cpu fan?
BuckeyeSparky 1 year ago
@BuckeyeSparky I don't know very much about the e8400, but if it has headroom to be overclocked, then it should overclock with sufficient cooling and raises in voltage (if needed). You should always go for the lowest voltage possible for the clock speed you desire, to create the least heat (and draw less power from the wall). There are many guides on how to overclock a cpu on the internet so just make sure you know how to reset the CMOS if you set a clock that won't boot etc. and you'll be OK!
gxtechnology 1 year ago