Is Overclocking...Over-rated?

[GFORCE100]

If you do something that's very sensitive to CPU/GPU speed such as media encoding then every little helps as it means more transcodes and/or less time to do them meaning more private time for you, your family and so forth.

Getting a system spot on stable 100% when overclocking can take time, knowledge and patience unless you have an unlocked CPU multiplier which simplifies things immensely (far less settings to worry about). As for GPU, most ship at frequencies already close to their maximums so overclocking them doesn't bring much in the form of performance.

 

[Avalon]

After you purchase special CPU COOLERS and fan controllers and extra fans, maybe you could just purchase a faster CPU and break even. Maybe you can get a little bit of a boost, but I would rather not bother. I figure I dont have the money to waste.

The way I look at it, is that people that overclock are the ones that end up RMA'ing all their damaged gear and raising the prices for everyone else. It can be more of a nuisance than it is worth. This is my personal opinion. I think all motherboard and processors should be locked to stop this abuse.

Just take responsibility for what you damage. Luckily most new motherboards have built in overheating protection. But it is not fail-proof.

Oh come on, leave the hyperbole at the doorstep. Every single processor I've ever bought and overclocked, I've done on a $30-40 cooler, usually with no additional fans to my existing setup, and outperformed a processor $500-600 costlier. I don't know of anyone who spends hundreds of dollars on their mainstream CPUs only to break even with a more expensive chip. No one.

Do you also realize how few people overclock and actually break their hardware? The majority of hardware RMA comes from incompatibility (perceived or real) or user error.

With thinking like that, it's no wonder you don't see any value in overclocking. I think it's perfectly fine for people to say they don't want to overclock, but I think it starts to get a bit silly when they try telling people that it's pretty much useless.

 

[Makaveli]

Oh come on, leave the hyperbole at the doorstep. Every single processor I've ever bought and overclocked, I've done on a $30-40 cooler, usually with no additional fans to my existing setup, and outperformed a processor $500-600 costlier. I don't know of anyone who spends hundreds of dollars on their mainstream CPUs only to break even with a more expensive chip. No one.

Do you also realize how few people overclock and actually break their hardware? The majority of hardware RMA comes from incompatibility (perceived or real) or user error.

With thinking like that, it's no wonder you don't see any value in overclocking. I think it's perfectly fine for people to say they don't want to overclock, but I think it starts to get a bit silly when they try telling people that it's pretty much useless.

I agree he sounds like someone that works in an RMA department for one of these companies and is sick of doing his job lol.

 

[Markfw]

After you purchase special CPU COOLERS and fan controllers and extra fans, maybe you could just purchase a faster CPU and break even. Maybe you can get a little bit of a boost, but I would rather not bother. I figure I dont have the money to waste.

The way I look at it, is that people that overclock are the ones that end up RMA'ing all their damaged gear and raising the prices for everyone else. It can be more of a nuisance than it is worth. This is my personal opinion. I think all motherboard and processors should be locked to stop this abuse.

Just take responsibility for what you damage. Luckily most new motherboards have built in overheating protection. But it is not fail-proof.

Wrong, just WRONG. First, motherboards don't have overheat protection, CPU's do. I have every CPU I have bought in the last 10 years overclocked, and never had a problem. I read these forums, and almost nobody breaks a CPU, or RMA's it, and we are just a very small percentage of people that even buy CPU's. So 1/10th of 1% of the 5% that buy CPU's RMA them (just an educated guess) ? And that causes prices to go up ?

Get real, wake up.

And I spent $40 on a CPU cooler that runs the CPU cooler than the stock cooler at stock, so if anything I am extending the life of my CPU, not lowering it.

 

[Acanthus]

While I believe you that you will probably get a long run out of that CPU at Intel's max voltage, the power usage will be through the roof on that machine. I remember seeing several graphs showing how watts scales with Mhz and voltage. Once you hit a certain point, it skyrockets and is really putting the voltage regulators under some serious stress.

For a Q6600, the sweet spot is around 3.2Ghz. After that, you really have to start ramping up the voltage for each 100Mhz step and in my opinion it's just not worth it given the power draw.

Of course, for extreme overclockers its a sport and they gladly take the watts hit!

It adds up to about $25 a year in power.

 

[Holler]

Is Overclocking...Over-rated?

try running Tri SLI at 6120x1080

 

[Deanodarlo]

It adds up to about $25 a year in power.

To me, it's not just about the poor efficiency, but the heat and stress components are placed under vs overclocking to a comfortable limit where there are practically no drawbacks.

I really like near silent, quiet and compact systems without buying premium gear. A decent motherboard yes, essential for a half decent overclock, but that's about it. To hit highest speeds, you do need some decent and expensive kit for a relatively small boost in performance over the more standard stuff overclocked to a lower limit.

Therefore I think it's best to overclock to the point where you don't see diminishing returns on investment, power usage or encourage a higher failure rate - not only from the CPU, but the motherboard, RAM and PSU. Same goes for graphics cards.

If you need the further 300Mhz or so out of a Q6600 for example, just get a new PC and happily sell your old hardware on knowing it hasn't been abused pushing towards the max.

That's what I feel more comfortable doing, but I'm getting sensible and boring as the years go on....

 

[Acanthus]

To me, it's not just about the poor efficiency, but the heat and stress components are placed under vs overclocking to a comfortable limit where there are practically no drawbacks.

I really like near silent, quiet and compact systems without buying premium gear. A decent motherboard yes, essential for a half decent overclock, but that's about it. To hit highest speeds, you do need some decent and expensive kit for a relatively small boost in performance over the more standard stuff overclocked.

Therefore I think it's best to overclock to the point where you don't see diminishing returns on investment, power usage or encourage a higher failure rate - not only from the CPU, but the motherboard and PSU.

If you need the further 300Mhz or so out of a Q6600 for example, just get a new PC and happily sell your old hardware on knowing it hasn't been abused pushing towards the max.

That's what I feel more comfortable doing.

I have a hand-me-down system going for me so the parts really never leave my oversight.

It goes Me => My Living Room HTPC => My Parents => My Grandfather

His PC is still running flawlessly despite being overclocked for years on end (e2160 @ 2.8ghz).

I would say it is true that if you use very cheap components that the additional stress could cause hardware failures, but if you at least use quality components then you'll be good to go (although standard fail rates still apply).

 

[Deanodarlo]

Yeah, I respect your viewpoint Acanthus, you talk a lot of sense for your situation. I guess it's really subjective how far is too far on an overclock!

I think I'm just far too sensible with hardware these days. I used to run things on the edge, but then got boring and sensible the last couple of years!

 

[Avalon]

Yeah, I respect your viewpoint Acanthus, you talk a lot of sense for your situation. I guess it's really subjective how far is too far on an overclock!

I think I'm just far too sensible with hardware these days. I used to run things on the edge, but then got boring and sensible the last couple of years!

There's varying degrees of overclockers. I'm probably more in your camp where I like to get a good boost out of it, but not at the expense of a lot of added voltage. I still find I can get tremendous overclocks even when keeping these values in mind.

 

[exar333]

I have a hand-me-down system going for me so the parts really never leave my oversight.

It goes Me => My Living Room HTPC => My Parents => My Grandfather

His PC is still running flawlessly despite being overclocked for years on end (e2160 @ 2.8ghz).

I would say it is true that if you use very cheap components that the additional stress could cause hardware failures, but if you at least use quality components then you'll be good to go (although standard fail rates still apply).

Unfortunately, many people toss their computers when they work fine. They do so because of viruses, bloatware, etc. Plus, most people buy crap machines made in China with poor components like Dells/HP/etc.

If you buy quality components and take care of them (e.g. keep them decently cooled) they will generally last a long time. Case in point; I gave my little sister my old PIII 450 build back in 2004. That machine was 5+ years old at the time and ran just like new.

I now also recycle my parts and/or builds to friends and family. When I get them the equipment, I also show them how to keep it in good working order and what to do if something breaks. It is MILES easier to swap-out an old video-card, CPU, or DIMM versus what you need to do with a proprietary system. It is amazing how many people I have gotten into building PCs after they see (or do) a build. These days, it takes 5x as long to install Windows vs. put the pieces together. For a simple build now, you need a MB, CPU, DIMMs, PSU, HDD, optical drive, and case. You can assemble them in 10-15 minutes, often-times.

 

[exar333]

Sorry to get off-topic. Overclocking is a great tool IMHO. I remember my first dual-core build, the E2160. I OC'd that to 3.2-3.4Ghz and it was AWESOME for that time. The CPU was $60, the MB was $70, and the 2GB RAM was $20. I bought all of these and actually sold them over a year later for MORE than I bought them for.

 

[Phunk0ne]

I basically like to overclock my system mainly as a hobby but also because in having a tighter budget.

One of my favorite CPU's still is my old trusty C2D E6750. Ran that sucker stable @ 3.9Ghz (2.66Ghz stock) for quite a while. it was fun messing around with it and a real e-sport getting it rock solid at that speed during stress tests and gaming.

even when I do not use any photo altering or rendering software, I just cannot leave my hardware not overclocked. for some a very serious business, and for others like me, a very fun way of getting to know your hardware. I do have to say, I never had to rma any of my hardware because of an overclock attempt, albeit I first read as much as I can about overclocking and the forums of Anandtech and its members helped me alot in understanding the benefits and risks.

all I can really say though, if you are hesitant about overclocking, it might be a better to steer clear from this subject and stick to your stock setup