Does overclocking save you money in the long run?

[BuckMaster]

MrCodeDude i sure hope you dont use the same hardware in 5 years! I upgrade atleast once a year atleast one piece of hardware. Now days hardware gets so out dated so fast. But if you can use the same hardware and beable to play the newest games and software apps 5 years from now please tell me the trick!

 

[Shalmanese]

dont forget, peltiers and watercoolers etc are recyclable as well, after this CPU becomes obsolete, you can just use it on the next one or sell it.

 

[RGN]

<< Still, it burns out hardware. I'd rather have my PC running 200mhz slower than it could be, rather than it frying itself in 5 years.. Plus, I don't want a loud fan..
-- mrcodedude >>



5 Years? OMG, my I upgrade every 4 months... :Q


eRyan

 

[Red Dawn]

It might save you a little on harware but it doesn't make you or your system noticably more profficent.

 

[FrontlineWarrior]

Man I hear you guys. I noticed that I had to buy quality components (motherboard, memory, computer case, HSF) just to think about overclocking. I'm wondering if I saved any money, but then again I'm running at 133 FSB instead of 100 that's default with the duron, so I guess I'm improving performance... sort of. But then again I don't care because doing all this was much more fun than going to fry's and picking up an emachine. lol

 

[DeepBlue]

<< dont forget, peltiers and watercoolers etc are recyclable as well, after this CPU becomes obsolete, you can just use it on the next one or sell it. >>


Yes but the cost of purchasing a peltier itself would be less than the total cost of operating it after a certain amount of time.

 

[Pacfanweb]

I always thought the whole point of overclocking was to end up with more processor than you paid for.
Example: I bought a P3 650 about this time last year, and was able to run it reliably at 910 with no fancy cooling. At the time, buying an 866 P3 was over 200.00 more bucks than was the 650, so that was great bang for the buck.

Now, it seems like cpu's have gotten so cheap that it isn't worth it to buy a lesser cpu and overclock it.
Example: Reputable places to buy overclocked cpu's have a 1.33 T-bird for around 125.00 or so.
There is no guarantee if you will get a 200 or 266 fsb processor, and you have to have a pretty decent cooler for it.
My question would be, why bother? For about 8 more bucks, you can buy a real 1.33 T bird and not have to worry about bumping up the voltage, etc. And yes, you can get them all day long, the places that advertise them DO have them in stock.
If you could save a significant amount of money, then I'd say go for it, but if you can get the real thing for less than 50 bucks difference on cpu price alone, why bother?
Overclocking just isn't the same as back in the day when you could get a 366 celeron and run it at 550.

 

[apoppin]

Overclocking is usually a Win-Win situation for the overclocker except for the extreme situations.

For example, to get 1.5Ghz from a 700Mhz processor by cooling with liquid nitrogen is NOT cost-effective.

However, to get 3.0Ghz from a 1.7Ghz processor by liquid nitrogen cooling is priceless in terms of bragging rights since you now have one of the almost unique desktop processors on this planet. And you can then adapt your expensive cooling solution for the next faster CPUs.

However, for &quot;normal&quot; overclocking it IS worth it. For example - 18 months ago - I saved almost $200 buying a PIII 600E and overclocking to 800Mhz instead of buying a 800E. The CPU is still running at 10% higher voltage than stock and using a $20 Golden Orb fan. Extra electricity used is very minimal.

And soon it is time to upgrade to another very overclockable processor. I expect my 600E CPU will be good for a few more years until technology totally passes it by.

At the very least, find the &quot;sweet spot&quot; that extra 10-20% in PERFORMANCE INCREASE without raising the voltage and see how much $$ you save over the next highest stepping. 10% performance increase IS noticeable and FREE!