"Overclocking an Intel chip...just HOW MUCH do you cut short a chip's LIFE?"


Senior member
Dec 11, 2000
I hear all these stories of how overclocking your CPU chip cuts short the life of the chip which shouldn't be such a big if, lets say, you cut it down from a normal 15 year life to maybe 7-8 years by overclocking but if you cut it down to about 2 years then I would have a huge problem with this....I currently have 3 systems right now that are overclocked ( A Celeron 300a OC'ed to 450 , A PII 300 OC'ed to 450 and a PIII 550 OC'ed to 793 )
The Celeron has only been running for about a year now and already I have seen problems with it posting past 300mhz anymore and am wondering why this would have started happing now after a year?.....I saw it comming because before it refused to boot past 300 mhz, I noticed I was having more and more problems with it posting past 300 prior until it finally just wont post at any other speed other than 300mhz. It was posting 450 fine about 3-4 months ago with no problems...could the cache be fried or what?...I am really concerned because i have the other 2 PCs that i have been running Overclocked for under a year now and am wondering if their end will also be comming soon?

Please give me your feedback on how long you have been running Overclocked and please be honest....Machismo wont help me here <g>

Also can you give some theories behind an average overclocked chip's lifespan and finally if you can give me some insight as to what happened to my Celeron 300a and why it will no longer boot past it's original 300mhz speed anymore

Any info or help you can provide will be greatly appreciated here...THANKS!!


Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
In my experience overclocking a CPU doesn't harm it unless you're using too much voltage or not cooling it properly. Most of these P3-700E CPU's floating around now have the same core as the 933+ CPU's. In many cases you can drop one into a MB and set the FSB to 133 and bang, your P3-700 turns into a P3-933. I've got 2 of them myself. One is running at 933 and the other (purchased from compuwiz1) runs at 1014. In both cases I am using extra voltage (1.75 &amp; 1.8) to keep them stable but I'm using a Golden Orb to cool them. They both run cooler than my Brother's retail P3-933EB.

Am I decreasing the life of the CPU? Maybe. But my guess is I'll be replacing it long before it fails due to overclocking. I had a Celeron 300A that was overclocked to 464 for about 3 years before giving it to a friend. I had to use 2.3v (15% over) and a big HS/F to keep it stable. He's been running it for a little over a year now with no stability problems. I have a feeling that your 300A is one of those that isn't capable of running at 450. Have you tried a better cooler and/or bumped up the voltage?



Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
My 300a has been running at 450 for two years now. If you are having trouble with it posting above 300 after a year, I would replace the fan/heat sink.


Golden Member
Dec 14, 2000
i have been running my C400 at 540 for almost 2 years without any problems. :)

Moving Target

Senior member
Dec 6, 1999
If you are running stock voltage I can't see how over clocking would affect cpu life, but if you are adding voltage I could see that shorting cpu life.


Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
The thing that shortens the life span is mainly the voltage. The Mhz has alot less to do with it, but if you turn up the voltage you will shorten its life span. The more voltage the shorter the CPU will last. Turning it up 10% wont cause a problem, turning it up 20% might shorten it some but not alot, turning it up 30% or more is when you can start losing some major life, but this can very quite a bit from CPU to CPU also.