why do people like saying never overclocked when they sell something?

[omniviper]

i dunno if its just me but why do people like saying "its never been overclocked" when selling something.

DOH, i know that its to increase the sellability of an item. But it doesnt seem honest, especially when some people who sell are pure anandtechers = hardcore pc dudes who like squeezing every square inch of silicon on their rig

Just a small observation

 

[Jeff7181]

Or how about claiming it's never been overclocked when asking questions about RMAing it, but your max overclock is in your sig?

 

[PHiuR]

i have a 2500 and its known to be oerclockable but i havent..if i sold it i would put never overclocked.

 

[ribbon13]

I don't care either way. If it still has warranty and an RMA is rejected because it HAS been overclocked, I'll likely have thier address :evil:

 

[notfred]

What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

 

[quakefiend420]

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

thats very true...however increasing voltage to overclock does reduce the life expectancy of a chip..a barton mobile 2500+ that was run at 2.1v@2.7ghz for 6 months is not likely to outlive the same chip that was run at 1.45v@1.8ghz(stock) now is it?

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

I think it would be more like.. "never redlined it"

 

[imported_Mike]

Well, I don't overclock anything and when I say something in my FS/FT thread, I back every word of it up with my heat...

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

thats very true...however increasing voltage to overclock does reduce the life expectancy of a chip..a barton mobile 2500+ that was run at 2.1v@2.7ghz for 6 months is not likely to outlive the same chip that was run at 1.45v@1.8ghz(stock) now is it?

Show me one instance of a CPU failing that can be attributed to past overclocking.

 

[Hossenfeffer]

I haven't even messed with overclocking for years. I just didn't see the point in it. In fact, I wouldn't mind underclocking things if it would keep the heat/noise down a bit. Now if I could see/feel/experience a huge, noticeable difference in performance, I might consider it, but I can't really tell.

If and when I sell my stuff, it'll be "never overclocked". Wouldn't mention except for the thing you mention about so many users here being into overclocking. Sort of a catch-22 if you ask me.

 

[quakefiend420]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

thats very true...however increasing voltage to overclock does reduce the life expectancy of a chip..a barton mobile 2500+ that was run at 2.1v@2.7ghz for 6 months is not likely to outlive the same chip that was run at 1.45v@1.8ghz(stock) now is it?

Show me one instance of a CPU failing that can be attributed to past overclocking.

well...i dont have any specific examples...but are you honestly going to say that you would expect the first barton to outlive the second one?

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

thats very true...however increasing voltage to overclock does reduce the life expectancy of a chip..a barton mobile 2500+ that was run at 2.1v@2.7ghz for 6 months is not likely to outlive the same chip that was run at 1.45v@1.8ghz(stock) now is it?

Show me one instance of a CPU failing that can be attributed to past overclocking.

well...i dont have any specific examples...but are you honestly going to say that you would expect the first barton to outlive the second one?

I would expect them both to be able to run reliably for at least ten more years, which is about 7 years longer than anyone would actually be using either of them.

 

[CTrain]

Or...

Selling a car..."Only driven by an old lady"
Selling a car..."All highway miles"
Or selling anything..."openned but never used"

 

I don't overclock...I like getting new hardware but I'm not a gamer so there's no need for me to do it.

 

[pclstyle]

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

I think it would be more like.. "never redlined it"

 

[MrBond]

It helps limit the PM's you get asking if it's ever been overclocked and how high it'll go though. If you sell a 1.8A and don't mention if you've overclocked it or not, you're going to get people asking if you've overclocked it and how fast it'd go.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

thats very true...however increasing voltage to overclock does reduce the life expectancy of a chip..a barton mobile 2500+ that was run at 2.1v@2.7ghz for 6 months is not likely to outlive the same chip that was run at 1.45v@1.8ghz(stock) now is it?

Show me one instance of a CPU failing that can be attributed to past overclocking.

well...i dont have any specific examples...but are you honestly going to say that you would expect the first barton to outlive the second one?

I would expect them both to be able to run reliably for at least ten more years, which is about 7 years longer than anyone would actually be using either of them.

Yeah, I'd agree with that... the lifespan of CPU is long enough that OCing isn't likely shorten it noticeably.

 

[0roo0roo]

well it depends on how extreme u do it. i've burned a few after a while. i didn't care, chips were cheap

 

[IHYLN]

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

thats very true...however increasing voltage to overclock does reduce the life expectancy of a chip..a barton mobile 2500+ that was run at 2.1v@2.7ghz for 6 months is not likely to outlive the same chip that was run at 1.45v@1.8ghz(stock) now is it?

Too bad you don't have any idea about thermoconductivity. At best you took a few months off the chip's life which is probably around 10 years. Stop spreading FUD. It's not like you killed half the chip's life by OC'ing it a little.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: quakefiend420

Originally posted by: notfred
What difference does it make? People who think that overclocking a chip somehow damages a chip don't know WTF they're talking about. If you smash the chip with your heatsink, or run it with no heatsink, or try to run it at 17 volts or something, then yeah, you can break it. But chips aren't killed by being successfully overclocked.

Saying "never overclocked" about a CPU you're selling makes about as much sense as saying "never driven over the speed limit" about a car you're selling.

thats very true...however increasing voltage to overclock does reduce the life expectancy of a chip..a barton mobile 2500+ that was run at 2.1v@2.7ghz for 6 months is not likely to outlive the same chip that was run at 1.45v@1.8ghz(stock) now is it?

Show me one instance of a CPU failing that can be attributed to past overclocking.

I think the claim is true...but given that a CPU has a theoretical lifespan of 10 years, even if it was reduced by half it would still be old and useless long before then. So its not really a big deal.

 

[moomoo40moo]

So that the warranty is still valid if its retail?

 

[Budmantom]

NEW "only opened box to check contents"

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: CTrain
Or...

Selling a car..."Only driven by an old lady"
Selling a car..."All highway miles"
Or selling anything..."openned but never used"

No. The best by far is "I only opened it to test that it works."