I've been overclocking Intel Processors for years. My first I think, was a Celeron 300a which was a Slot-1 architecture processor that overclocked by 50% to 450MHz very easily. I used it for years.
My background before PC repair was hot-rodding and building fast cars. I still have an old Corvette with a very large engine and it's built MY way. And when I drive it, I drive it like I built it to-hard and fast. I will notice a very high RPM missfire that the average driver may never feel, just because of the way I drive it. When I build engines, I build with all new parts, and they HAVE to be the correct name brand or I won't trust it.
Now back to computers: My last build was a Quad Core 6600 that overclocked to 3.4GHz very well and I used it three years until building this i7 920. I always get the version of the processor that will Overclock by doing my homework on forums like this.
But here's the thing: I have NEVER had to use an aftermarket heatsink/fan. The Intel units have always worked for me. Now, I don't do MAX overclocking, but I always do enough to be able to feel a real-world day to day difference in performance.
Question: What is the point of temp monitoring & spending hundreds of dollars on high tech CPU coolers, if the only time they come into play is during testing? I can see if a machine is UBER overclocked and you are running 24 hours of Prime95. My hat is off to you.
But then, for the next year or two until the next gen processor comes out, that computer is going to be used for regular Windows applications and such. It will never run as hot as it did during that Prime95 testing.
My computer with this i7 processor runs GREAT. It's clocked at 3.4 and CoreTemp reports 55* at idle and 65* under load, processing images in Photoshop. I use special software also to combine & stack astronomy photos, which locks on to the position of as many stars as it can see in a field of view, and stacks the images so that when the telescope's camera shoots very dim targets the images can be processed.
These astro cameras produce very large images which get stacked by the dozens, to make faint objects show. Even during the stacking of 50 shots, each 1200x1600 pixels, and importing to Photoshop 64-bit, this CPU never gets above 65 degrees.
So here's my point and conclusion: This computer does not overheat in it's current overclocked state, using it the way I normally use it. It is now 30 days old and Win7 64 has never crashed. Sure, it may overheat using INtel's HSF if I try to use Prime95 for 24 hours or so.
But WHY BOTHER????? It runs cool, fast, and IT DOES EVERYTHING I NEED IT TO DO VERY WELL USING THE STOCK HSF. I don't need to clock it higher, or cool is cooler for what I use the computer for.
And I really don't think that most folks push their computers hard enough to need better cooling than Intel provides - unless they are constantly testing it.
My background before PC repair was hot-rodding and building fast cars. I still have an old Corvette with a very large engine and it's built MY way. And when I drive it, I drive it like I built it to-hard and fast. I will notice a very high RPM missfire that the average driver may never feel, just because of the way I drive it. When I build engines, I build with all new parts, and they HAVE to be the correct name brand or I won't trust it.
Now back to computers: My last build was a Quad Core 6600 that overclocked to 3.4GHz very well and I used it three years until building this i7 920. I always get the version of the processor that will Overclock by doing my homework on forums like this.
But here's the thing: I have NEVER had to use an aftermarket heatsink/fan. The Intel units have always worked for me. Now, I don't do MAX overclocking, but I always do enough to be able to feel a real-world day to day difference in performance.
Question: What is the point of temp monitoring & spending hundreds of dollars on high tech CPU coolers, if the only time they come into play is during testing? I can see if a machine is UBER overclocked and you are running 24 hours of Prime95. My hat is off to you.
But then, for the next year or two until the next gen processor comes out, that computer is going to be used for regular Windows applications and such. It will never run as hot as it did during that Prime95 testing.
My computer with this i7 processor runs GREAT. It's clocked at 3.4 and CoreTemp reports 55* at idle and 65* under load, processing images in Photoshop. I use special software also to combine & stack astronomy photos, which locks on to the position of as many stars as it can see in a field of view, and stacks the images so that when the telescope's camera shoots very dim targets the images can be processed.
These astro cameras produce very large images which get stacked by the dozens, to make faint objects show. Even during the stacking of 50 shots, each 1200x1600 pixels, and importing to Photoshop 64-bit, this CPU never gets above 65 degrees.
So here's my point and conclusion: This computer does not overheat in it's current overclocked state, using it the way I normally use it. It is now 30 days old and Win7 64 has never crashed. Sure, it may overheat using INtel's HSF if I try to use Prime95 for 24 hours or so.
But WHY BOTHER????? It runs cool, fast, and IT DOES EVERYTHING I NEED IT TO DO VERY WELL USING THE STOCK HSF. I don't need to clock it higher, or cool is cooler for what I use the computer for.
And I really don't think that most folks push their computers hard enough to need better cooling than Intel provides - unless they are constantly testing it.
It causes a lot of secondary effects to the surrounding components. 
Facebook
Twitter