Why Overclock?

[Thokor]

Why bother overclocking Core 2 Duo's right now, is it because we can? Unless you are running a 8800 GTX you are videocard limited even with a stock e6400 @ 1280x1024 res and higher. My normal 3dmark06 score is 5737 with my machine at stock, I cranked my CPU up to 350 x 8 ( 2800 mhz ), ran it through 3dmark06 and my score was 6036. I then opened up the results to check where most of the gain was and it was all CPU score, the most I saw in Proxycon and Firefly was a .3 fps increase. Just curious why people crank up the CPU which leads to high heat and very loud fan noise all for 1 or 2 FPS in high res games?

http://members.shaw.ca/sdw/266fsb.JPG

http://members.shaw.ca/sdw/350fsb.JPG

Thanks

 

[DrMrLordX]

Because not everyone uses their PC exclusively for gaming, and because some games (FEAR, Oblivion, NWN2) have reportedly shown significant speed improvements from CPU overclocks.

 

[Thokor]

Hrm on a C2D? I was getting 79 FPS at 1280 x 1024 just as you exit the starting dungeon in Oblivion. When I set my clock to 350 x8 and loaded the same game I get 81. Are these gains you are talking about at 1024 x 768? I am not putting it down I just cant seem to justify the CPU fan spinning at 2x the RPM and the case fans having to be turned up to medium ( scares the cat ) I guess If I had headphones and a deaf wife it might be different.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Mostly I'm referring to old comparisons that were done between an Opteron 170 @ 3 ghz vs a Conroe ES at 3 Ghz with a Crossfire rig. Your results may vary, but I've seen some folks claim considerable fps increases in this game and some others. 2 FPS in Oblivion hardly seems worth it.

However, gaming results aside, not everyone uses their PC for gaming exclusively. Overclocking helps with video/audio encoding,f@h, photoshop, and numerous other applications.

For me, the fan noise has never been a problem, and scaring cats is fun for the whole family. However, I have to draw the line somewhere . . . I could not justify using something like this at full speed:

http://www.sidewindercomputers.com/de12tfexhisp.html

 

[Stumps]

I overclock because I can.....I pretty much overclocked every PC I've own since my 486 days...usually I couldn't afford the high end models so I just overclocked my slightly lower spec CPU's to match the top of the range model

eg a 486DX33 nearly always became a DX2/66 if your motherboard supported the 2x Multiply and with the addition of a small HSF unit...40mm FTW :thumbsup:

Same goes for a DX2/66 and DX4/75, they nearly always went to DX4/100 and DX4/120....nothing like the days when 33mhz increase took Intel a year and half to release, and they cost hundreds of dollars more than the next model down.

I've alway liked to push my hardware and get the most out of it...and beside nothing like a free increase in perfomance.

 

[Zim]

If you have to ask... it probably ain't for you.

 

[Hulk]

I overclock for video editing, audio editing, multitasking performance, overall system performance... my time is not well spent waiting on my computer. My overclock from 2.13 to 3.2 is a 50% increase, even if it saves me 15 minutes on average a day that's 15 minutes I would never have gotten back.

In addition in some applications, like video editing, a few extra frames per second during a preview can really make a difference reviewing and edit.

Finally, the $50 I spent for an aftermarket cooler more than makes up for the $750 I saved in not needing to purchase the 2.93GHz C2D that still would most likely not be as fast as my 3.2 in the apps I need since they require cpu cycles more than L2.

So in summary I overclock because I require a fast computer and have better things to do with my money than feed Intel.

 

[Thokor]

Originally posted by: Zim
If you have to ask... it probably ain't for you.

Kind of a silly answer, this isn't fight club as far as I know. I did logical real world tests in a current bencmark and a current harware heavy game. I admit I didn't test CPU type apps and it would make sense to OC with those as it is "free" upgrades.

I stand by what I said in the original post. On a C2D system in heavy graphic games at 1280 x 1024 or higher, a moderate OC's does not give you a performance gain that justifies the increase heat and fan noise.

 

[Thokor]

Originally posted by: Hulk
I overclock for video editing, audio editing, multitasking performance, overall system performance... my time is not well spent waiting on my computer. My overclock from 2.13 to 3.2 is a 50% increase, even if it saves me 15 minutes on average a day that's 15 minutes I would never have gotten back.

In addition in some applications, like video editing, a few extra frames per second during a preview can really make a difference reviewing and edit.

Finally, the $50 I spent for an aftermarket cooler more than makes up for the $750 I saved in not needing to purchase the 2.93GHz C2D that still would most likely not be as fast as my 3.2 in the apps I need since they require cpu cycles more than L2.

So in summary I overclock because I require a fast computer and have better things to do with my money than feed Intel.

Now this is a great answer and clearly shows why overclocking is good for this situation.

 

[myocardia]

The answer to your question is threefold: they use their PC's for something other than gaming, because they can, or because they already own an 8800GTX. Even with a single 8800GTX, overclocking your C2D 50% will give you a 50% increase in framerates, in a game that's already cpu-bound, like M$'s Flight Simulator X, for instance. Of course, any software that's cpu-bound (i.e., everything except games or CAD rendering) gains the same amount, if you overclock.

 

[Zim]

Originally posted by: Thokor

Originally posted by: Zim
If you have to ask... it probably ain't for you.

Kind of a silly answer, this isn't fight club as far as I know. I did logical real world tests in a current bencmark and a current harware heavy game. I admit I didn't test CPU type apps and it would make sense to OC with those as it is "free" upgrades.

I stand by what I said in the original post. On a C2D system in heavy graphic games at 1280 x 1024 or higher, a moderate OC's does not give you a performance gain that justifies the increase heat and fan noise.

If you wanted a bigger living room in your house, you wouldn't add an entension to your kitchen instead, would you? So why would you increase your CPU speed and expect a significant increase in 3D video performance? Just about everyone knows (or can quickly find out) that 3D video performance depends almost entirely on the video card. If you want to overclock something, overclock your video card.

The real answer as to why most people overclock their processor is simple: because they can. Just as some people like to supe-up cars, some of us get a kick out of suping up our computers. The end result almost never makes a huge real-world difference to any computing job, it just promotes a sense of achievement. We like to think we got something for nothing; pushing a E6300 to rival E6800 performance for instance. On the downside we risk sacrificing system stability. Want to build a sytem for your mum who lives 2000 miles away and know that it will keep running? You won't want to overclock it. I'll go even further...

Even if you increase your processor performance by 100% you will not experience any significant advantage in anything you do. Even if it takes you 10 minutes instead of 20 minutes to encode that video file, what difference does that 10 minutes make? For most people, no difference. If you overclock your video card and now get 80 fps instead of 60 fps, what of significance have you gained? Nothing. Once our computers have achieved a certain level of performance (and most have) any gains beyond that are subject to the law of rapidly diminishing rerturns.

 

[harpoon84]

Because overclocking = free performance. Why run your E6400 @ 2.1GHz when you know it will most likely hit 3.2GHz+ totally stable? I hate running my CPU @ 66% of it's potential, I want every MHz it can muster. Side effects? What side effects? So your CPU will run 10C hotter and cost you an extra dollar or two per month in the electricity bill - big woopty doo.

Perhaps it's encoding a video, or saving 10 seconds when uncompressing a large file or applying complex Photoshop effects, or perhaps to get higher framerates in CPU limited games - there are many reasons to overclock an already fast CPU.

 

[Diogenes2]

Originally posted by: Thokor

Originally posted by: Zim
If you have to ask... it probably ain't for you.

Kind of a silly answer..

Says you ..

I stand by what I said in the original post. On a C2D system in heavy graphic games at 1280 x 1024 or higher, a moderate OC's does not give you a performance gain that justifies the increase heat and fan noise.

Let me make sure I understand..

You cranked up your CPU, and the CPU test scores in 3DMark went up ? Hmmmmmm.. ( scratches chin thoughtfully )

Who's being silly ?

What are you calling a ' moderate ' overclock ? ( Which was not what you said in the OP )
A moderate overclock will not result in any significant increase in heat and fan noise, unless you just want to speed up your fan ( which will lower the heat )
but I agree; why bother ?


On the other hand, not bumping your CPU a gig, when it will do it, seems really silly to me...

You might ask why Intel sells ' Under-clocked ' CPU's...

Does that seem silly ?

 

[mbeleni]

When I put my system together, I made a personal goal of hitting 3.0 ghz just because I've never owned a system faster than the 2.3 ghz I got my 2500+ and so it's my first 3.0+ ghz rig. Getting that on a E6600 has been a very pleasant surprise. Now I'm all set for the R600 upgrade!

There are definitely performance benefits of having 600 mhz more at your disposal on a C2D than you would otherwise at stock speeds, in and out of games. This additional performance, it's completely free. If it's there, why not take advantage of it? And if you think you're plenty fast enough already, then leave it, and just enjoy the ride.

 

[imported_Dekard]

I like this article for answer the question, why overclock? http://www.overclockingwiki.org/index.php?title=Overclocking_basics

 

[Markfw]

Going from 1.86 to 3.4 makes a BIG difference. And its not louder.

 

[keeleysam]

Because I run SETI@home.

And 3.8 GHz just sounds so much cooler than 2.66 GHz.

 

[crispy2010]

Cuts video encoding times, high dc pts, low pi scores. Just for bragging rights!

 

[CP5670]

I do it because it's free and it helps a lot in emulators and numerical computation apps. Although I never noticed much of an improvement in modern games. (I'm still on an X2 though)

 

[Dudewithoutapet]

Well I dont know too much about C2D, however, with my A64 I overclocked it for various reasons. The main reasons being DVD ripping, load times, and multitasking. A faster CPU made DVD ripping much quicker, time that I save can be spent else where. Same with load times, especially just turning on the computer (Windows load was cut down so much once I OCed). Maybe you are only saving a couple of minutes a day (maybe more, maybe less), but in a year that adds up, right? It becomes a lot of time saved and spent doing something else, or spent with someone else Multitasking is pretty obvious, faster CPU = more things opened at once.

Edit- so yeah, if you've read everything correctly, you will see that very few of us OC for gaming reasons. You seem to bounce back to why people OC for gaming. We don't........

 

[Thokor]

Originally posted by: Diogenes2

Originally posted by: Thokor

Originally posted by: Zim
If you have to ask... it probably ain't for you.

Kind of a silly answer..

Says you ..

I stand by what I said in the original post. On a C2D system in heavy graphic games at 1280 x 1024 or higher, a moderate OC's does not give you a performance gain that justifies the increase heat and fan noise.

Let me make sure I understand..

You cranked up your CPU, and the CPU test scores in 3DMark went up ? Hmmmmmm.. ( scratches chin thoughtfully )

Who's being silly ?

What are you calling a ' moderate ' overclock ? ( Which was not what you said in the OP )
A moderate overclock will not result in any significant increase in heat and fan noise, unless you just want to speed up your fan ( which will lower the heat )
but I agree; why bother ?


On the other hand, not bumping your CPU a gig, when it will do it, seems really silly to me...

You might ask why Intel sells ' Under-clocked ' CPU's...

Does that seem silly ?

I dont understand why people get so defensive about this, its like I am attacking your religion. I am just trying to make a point not based on opinion, but based on real world testing.

City of Heroes @ stock 1280 x 1024 = 55 fps average while doing a test loop in SC
City of heroes @ 2.8 OC 1280 x 1024 = 58 fps average while doing a test loop in SC

I clearly stated several times, " why overclock in GAMES with res over 1280 by 1024 when using a graphics card other than a 8800gtx." Because clearly GPU's are the bottleneck now and not the C2D. People seem to have blinders on to this fact, you even quoted the exact sentence......

I stand by what I said in the original post. On a C2D system in heavy graphic games at 1280 x 1024 or higher, a moderate OC's does not give you a performance gain that justifies the increase heat and fan noise.

Let me make sure I understand..

Then said

You cranked up your CPU, and the CPU test scores in 3DMark went up ? Hmmmmmm.. ( scratches chin thoughtfully )

Boggle


I even said " I have not tested CPU intensive apps and this is one area that OC DOES helps "

P.S. Moderate overclock was an e6400 to 2.8 not the usualy 3.2 that most people strive for.

 

[Thokor]

Guys ( and girls ).

I am not slamming the over clock community, I am just trying to inject a few points for the gamers who come here. Most of them might not realize that with high res gaming over clocking your C2D 30% to 50% does not equate to 30% to 50% increase in FPS. More like 3% to 5% and it might not be worth the added heat and noise.

If you are doing any encoding ot CPU intensive non gaming tasks, then yes it is worth it.

 

[HannibalX]

Meh.

I have never been into overclocking much.

I have run older systems overclocked. Back when running your Celeron 300 @ 466 I was all about overclocking.

PCs are so fast now I don't have a need. It doesn't make much difference to me.

 

[JAG87]

remember some people do it just for sport. its like a personal challenge.

even gamers benefit from an overclock. Ill give you a rough idea of why that is, lets say you have 1 core running at 2.13 GHz, and 1 core running at 3.2 GHz. Lets say you are playing a game and encoding a video at the same time.

you are now in the situation where the game is trying to get most of the cpu for itself, and very little is left for the video. if your cpu is running at 2.13 GHz, most of the cycles will be dedicated to the game and very little to the video, lets say 66% for game and 33% for the video (although its not exactly like that, just for the sake of this example).
if your cpu is running at 3.2 GHz, the game takes the same 66% (which would give you the same performance as the 2.13 GHz at 100% load) and there is still 33% (extra, on top of the 2.13GHz) of the cpu that can be used for the video.

the point is that if the game and the video are running together and windows assigns the figures of 66% to the game and 33% to the video, with 3.2 GHz you get 2.13 GHz for the game and 1.07 for the video, while with 2.13 you get 1.4 GHz for the game and 0.7 GHz for the video. What do you think is better?

 

[Polish3d]

Because its fun