What's More Important To Look At When Overclocking - Temperature or Voltage??

[John P]

I have an Athlon XP 1600 @ 157 FSB running at 2.0v with an idle temperature or around 105F, loaded temp 115-120F on an Epox 8RDA+. I wasn't worried about the voltage because the temperature seemed so low but I have seen a few warnings on the boards about running at too high a voltage.

My Athlon XP 1700 on my ECS K7S5A board runs at 120F idle at default FSB by comparison. Both CPU's are using the SVC GC68 with a Thermaltake Smart Fan.

 

[ai42]

Well running higher voltages will give you higher overclocks, but there is some debate that higher voltages give you CPU Fatigue and will decrease the life of your CPU (but it's not like it matters as most of us replace our CPUs at least once every 2 years, and even at a higher voltage you should get around 4 yr life). Also diffrent chips respond diffrently to higher voltages 2v on a tbred is very diffrent than 2v on a Palmino. As for temps thats important too as you don't want to burn the chip. They are both important.

 

[Bovinicus]

The voltage is definitely more important. This is in part because raising the voltage also raises the heat, so raising the voltage actually does both. Raising the voltage more than 10% is a really bad idea. 5% is good if you want to be safe. I never overvolt when I overclock. I go as high as I can at default voltage. Furthermore, you can counteract the extra heat by buying an aftermarket heatsink. That way, you can be overclocking and still have lower temps than with the stock HSF. I had 65C+ load temps on my 1GHz@1.2GHz with a stock heatsink. I got an OCZ Gladiator and some case cooling. Now my temps are more like 49C on load.

 

[Electric Amish]

More voltage will decrease the life of the CPU, but excessive heat will outright KILL IT.

So, I think temperatures are more important to watch.

amish