It is not likely that he will introduce undetectable, deal-breaking errors into his production due to overclocking, as his video is played back and examined many times before being exported to some media or published for consumption. This is not a complex numerical simulation, it's video editing, and then encoding.
Overclocking is simple to test and simple to reverse. It would only take about 30 minutes to settle into a conservative 4.0 GHz overclock and do some rigorous testing and comparisons to see if it affects any of his output. The performance gains from such high frequencies are too easy to obtain and too great to simply ignore. I've encoded on a 4 ghz Yorkfield for many years and it has not varied my output nor introduced instability. If those are your only reservations, they can be addressed by testing.
Not overclocking your machine because someone told you there is a rule against it is almost as foolish as overclocking without testing. Lots of people already use x264 as a burn test. Why not Premiere?
Overclocking is simple to test and simple to reverse. It would only take about 30 minutes to settle into a conservative 4.0 GHz overclock and do some rigorous testing and comparisons to see if it affects any of his output. The performance gains from such high frequencies are too easy to obtain and too great to simply ignore. I've encoded on a 4 ghz Yorkfield for many years and it has not varied my output nor introduced instability. If those are your only reservations, they can be addressed by testing.
Not overclocking your machine because someone told you there is a rule against it is almost as foolish as overclocking without testing. Lots of people already use x264 as a burn test. Why not Premiere?