- Dec 29, 2010
- 3,034
- 1
- 81
Hi all,
I'm wondering if it's worthwhile to undo an overclock when I'm not gaming, in order to save power?
I have an AMD Phenom II X2 555 BE, and I'm able to run all 4 cores at around 3800-3900 MHz if I want to overclock for gaming by increasing the multiplier and the base frequency (for cpu bound stuff like starcraft II etc. where it makes a difference).
But since I don't game every day, i feel like it's a waste of power to run all 4 cores at such an overclock, even though i turn on all power savers like cool'n'quiet etc., though I think sometimes those are not going to help if you exceed a certain Mhz in your overclock (verify this? is it exceeding a certain multiplier, and/or exceeding a certain base frequency)? So that's the first issue, should I use a slower overclock, to stay within some range that allows me to preserve power saving features? So that my computer would be able to throttle down when i'm just browsing the internet, but then get use more performance when gaming, even while overclocked?
Now I'm just running my PhII 555 chip at stock again, using 2 cores at 3200 MHz, and putting up with slowdowns in starcraft II when lots of units are on the screen, moreso than if I'd kept the overclock.
Am I overestimating the power consumption difference between stock and overclocked with powersaving? All 4 cores active @ 3850 mhz with powersaving vs just 2 cores at stock 3200 mhz with powersaving - are we talking pennies a month for this type of overclock, or would it be more substantial?
The video card is not a factor as I'm not going to overclock the video card, just the CPU to help out Starcraft II when i play it. I'm not GPU bound, as it's a 5870 and I don't use antialiasing.
MOD EDIT: Double post. - Zap
I'm wondering if it's worthwhile to undo an overclock when I'm not gaming, in order to save power?
I have an AMD Phenom II X2 555 BE, and I'm able to run all 4 cores at around 3800-3900 MHz if I want to overclock for gaming by increasing the multiplier and the base frequency (for cpu bound stuff like starcraft II etc. where it makes a difference).
But since I don't game every day, i feel like it's a waste of power to run all 4 cores at such an overclock, even though i turn on all power savers like cool'n'quiet etc., though I think sometimes those are not going to help if you exceed a certain Mhz in your overclock (verify this? is it exceeding a certain multiplier, and/or exceeding a certain base frequency)? So that's the first issue, should I use a slower overclock, to stay within some range that allows me to preserve power saving features? So that my computer would be able to throttle down when i'm just browsing the internet, but then get use more performance when gaming, even while overclocked?
Now I'm just running my PhII 555 chip at stock again, using 2 cores at 3200 MHz, and putting up with slowdowns in starcraft II when lots of units are on the screen, moreso than if I'd kept the overclock.
Am I overestimating the power consumption difference between stock and overclocked with powersaving? All 4 cores active @ 3850 mhz with powersaving vs just 2 cores at stock 3200 mhz with powersaving - are we talking pennies a month for this type of overclock, or would it be more substantial?
The video card is not a factor as I'm not going to overclock the video card, just the CPU to help out Starcraft II when i play it. I'm not GPU bound, as it's a 5870 and I don't use antialiasing.
MOD EDIT: Double post. - Zap
Last edited by a moderator:
Facebook
Twitter