2.8C to a 3.4C: will it make a noticable difference...

[Elvis2]

my 2.8 runs 24/7 @ 3.45gig on stock voltage at 32C idle/ 38C load with a cheapo aquarius II water cooling rig (can't beat the performance for the cost ). i do a lot of cpu intensive gaming, ie. mostly flight and racing sims. what's considered an average overclock with a 3.4C?
tia

 

[yourdeardaniel]

no idea but if u wanna sell that 2.8C @ 3.4 on stock voltage, lemme know..

 

[jhurst]

Daniel: most 2.8C's will do 3.4ghz on stock voltage. My D1 would run @ 243FSB (3.37ghz) max on stock voltage/stock cooling. My M0 will run @ 250FSB (3.5ghz) on stock voltage.

Yea you will notice some difference in gaming. Its not going to be huge. Maybe a few FPS?

 

[Goi]

It depends on your video card as well. If you don't have at least a 9700Pro/5800U you probably won't see much of a difference

 

[Corporate Thug]

i really dont think its worth upgrading a 3.45 ghz chip

 

[Elvis2]

It depends on your video card as well. If you don't have at least a 9700Pro/5800U you probably won't see much of a difference

yep, agreed. i have a 9800xt now with an x800 xt ordered (when all is said and done the gpu upgrade will cost me $149.00 ).

i o/c my cpu's as high as they can go on stock voltage then back off a tad (since it's voltage that'll kill a P4 and not heat) but i don't want to go out and get a 3.4 if all i'll get out of it is around 3.8ghz. a 400mhz increase isn't worth a $265.00 expenditure ($415.00 - $150.00 for my 2.8= $265.00) to me.
i'm now considering a 3.2. if i can get 3.8 out of a 3.2 than that's more reasonable. i know the rest of my system can handle 250+fsb easily since i've tried it. the upgrade to a 3.2 would cost a $120.00.