-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Overclocking is the Dumbest thing you can do!
Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
- Status
WhoBeDaPlaya
Diamond Member
Holy necro!
AzN
Banned
Same here. Going 3.5 years with 60-80% overclock. No 10% here.
BTRY B 529th FA BN
Lifer
thanks for the laugh
yottabit
Golden Member
I'm guessing this anti-overclocking attitude stems from some professors who badmouth it because of some bad experiences... a guy I work with who has his masters (in Mech. E granted), but has lots of computer programming experience honestly thought that unless you were doing no more than a very slight overclock you would burn out a CPU in a matter of days.
He was actually surprised when I told him people get LARGE overclocks stable, and the extreme solutions (that likely result in short CPU life) are only necessary for really pushing the boundaries.
I haven't been that up on the times lately, but the only thing I can think of that would cause chip failure due to O/C (besides a power regulator or thermal failure) is electromigration over time due to a raised voltage... is this true and are there any other factors?
He was actually surprised when I told him people get LARGE overclocks stable, and the extreme solutions (that likely result in short CPU life) are only necessary for really pushing the boundaries.
I haven't been that up on the times lately, but the only thing I can think of that would cause chip failure due to O/C (besides a power regulator or thermal failure) is electromigration over time due to a raised voltage... is this true and are there any other factors?
Derek Hanson
Member
I've decided not to OC my next rig not because I'm worried about killing a chip but because of guarantee of stability.
In the past I've overclocked and ran all the prime torture tests to confirm "stability" but at some point I always ran into errors that I couldn't tolerate (some wackiness in protools in one case). I agree that if the PC is more for entertainment only (no professional work mixed in) then the stakes are much lower and I say go hog wild.. I know I have fun reading about insane overclocks that push the hardware to the limit.
Also, I doubt that the OP is an Intel troll or anything conspiracy related like that.. The OC enthusiast is good for business.. it gets more people interested in high-performance computing.. forces innovation in hardware design.. Intel and AMD are not so dumb to think that one troll on one forum will make all the OC'ers out there shit their pants and buy extreme edition chips..
Stability, not fear of frying chips, and end-purpose of the machine should be the main deciding factor for choosing to OC or not. Just my opinion..
In the past I've overclocked and ran all the prime torture tests to confirm "stability" but at some point I always ran into errors that I couldn't tolerate (some wackiness in protools in one case). I agree that if the PC is more for entertainment only (no professional work mixed in) then the stakes are much lower and I say go hog wild.. I know I have fun reading about insane overclocks that push the hardware to the limit.
Also, I doubt that the OP is an Intel troll or anything conspiracy related like that.. The OC enthusiast is good for business.. it gets more people interested in high-performance computing.. forces innovation in hardware design.. Intel and AMD are not so dumb to think that one troll on one forum will make all the OC'ers out there shit their pants and buy extreme edition chips..
Stability, not fear of frying chips, and end-purpose of the machine should be the main deciding factor for choosing to OC or not. Just my opinion..
I have overclocked as much as I had patience for & didn't have to spend stupid amounts of $$ ... on everything forever. "Forever" starts with TRS80 Z80s & Color Computers. Hmmm, there was that old IBM 1130 in the school's basement, but we don't talk about since that violated the license.D:
Well, ok ... slight exaggeration ... I had an HP 97 programmable calculator and just never could figure out how to get 1 more clock out of that thing. And I did have programs that ran all night on it.
Currently, the i7 920 (in the signature), is running a 36 hour program at 65% OC. As soon as I can get my hands on a hexa-core, I will & will swap out the i7 920. Yes, the i7 980X will run at stock speed but only briefly. Noting all temps. I don't care to run linx or OCCT for a week as I suspect that even a percentage of Dells will have issues.
If you can't afford to pay, don't play & stay very safe.
Seriously, if you cannot afford to pay, don't play!!!!!!
Well, ok ... slight exaggeration ... I had an HP 97 programmable calculator and just never could figure out how to get 1 more clock out of that thing. And I did have programs that ran all night on it.
Currently, the i7 920 (in the signature), is running a 36 hour program at 65% OC. As soon as I can get my hands on a hexa-core, I will & will swap out the i7 920. Yes, the i7 980X will run at stock speed but only briefly. Noting all temps. I don't care to run linx or OCCT for a week as I suspect that even a percentage of Dells will have issues.
If you can't afford to pay, don't play & stay very safe.
Seriously, if you cannot afford to pay, don't play!!!!!!
I bought my cpu the day it launched (in the G0 flavor).
With the overclock, it was much faster than the fastest thing offered at the time, which was over $1200. (and 3.2ghz vs 3.86ghz)
I spent $325 on the cpu, the cooling system was re-used from the older system it replaced (which went back to the stock intel cooler).
I use a relatively high voltage and do a lot of heavy lifting with the CPU.
No failures, no part replacements, 3 years strong.
Saved over $800, and my CPU is still considered top-notch today. (Although i'm finally going to upgrade when the 32nm quads and hexs come out)
With the overclock, it was much faster than the fastest thing offered at the time, which was over $1200. (and 3.2ghz vs 3.86ghz)
I spent $325 on the cpu, the cooling system was re-used from the older system it replaced (which went back to the stock intel cooler).
I use a relatively high voltage and do a lot of heavy lifting with the CPU.
No failures, no part replacements, 3 years strong.
Saved over $800, and my CPU is still considered top-notch today. (Although i'm finally going to upgrade when the 32nm quads and hexs come out)
TJCS
Senior member
Posting this thread in a enthusiast forum without any basis of reasoning or solid argument to justify its existence make this thread sound like a troll thread by the OP.
I think if the thread read something like "overclocking reduces the life of your system unless you are a dumbass" would make this a less waste of space.
I think if the thread read something like "overclocking reduces the life of your system unless you are a dumbass" would make this a less waste of space.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
