Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is overclocking really worth it?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
May 5, 2006 3:03:45 PM

I've played around with overclocking my P4HT 3.0Ghz all the way up to 4.0 Ghz and everything in between and all it seems to do is heat my house. I can't ever seem to find a noticeable improvement in anything except mabye a few frames faster in games. WHat exactly should I be looking for?

More about : overclocking worth

May 5, 2006 3:13:08 PM

You should be looking for a non-intel chip 8)
May 5, 2006 3:25:34 PM

Quote:
You should be looking for a non-intel chip 8)


No, you should be looking for a Core based Intel chip or pretty much any AMD chip. A recent Core Duo review showed an easy 50% overclock that didn't result in a miniature blast furnace. Ignore the fanboy.

On a serious note... the particular chip you've got does put out a lot of heat and overclocking just makes it that much worse.
Related resources
May 6, 2006 10:27:26 AM

Idealy, processes shouldn't lock the CPU, load times may be down slightly, things like compression and video playback should be smoother, basicly anything you might notice with a faster CPU.

As for if it's worth it, if you can get it rock stable and aren't risking burning the chip with excessive voltage, it's basicly like a free upgrade.

I run my 3800 X2 at 2.5 Ghz, a 25% overclock, and at speeds just under a 4600 X2, which runs for twice as much. Not too bad.
May 6, 2006 6:39:46 PM

The X2-4600 is clocked at 2.2 and if you're running your X2-3800 at 2.5 why doesn't it outperform the 4600? Unless you're comparing your CPU to an overclocked 4600, you have the faster chip. Good job saving that money!
May 8, 2006 1:26:04 AM

In my opinion, OC your PC is not worth the time or the potential harm that can be done to your computer. In the past, when the prices for faster CPUS' cost so much, then I did OC my PC to achive better performance. You really need to ask yourself, how much speed do you REALLY need to surf the internet or use a word processor. If you are a serious gamer, then you prob already have a kick ass machine! so OC is not neccessary.

And, If you need to ask if OC is worth it? Then you do not know enough about OC or Hardware for that matter to know the difference.

Please.. Use common sense and do not mess with your PC unless you know what you are doin.

Regards,

TechMaster
May 8, 2006 1:38:35 AM

what a lame first post... spoken from true inexperience I see. Do you have more fud?
May 8, 2006 1:45:50 AM

What ever do you mean? Is trying to give some good solid advise wrong?

Please... Enlighten me with your knowledge.
May 8, 2006 2:01:21 AM

I have never damaged a CPU or motherboard from overclocking and do believe it to be a legitimate and effective way to achieve better performance equal to or above the next higher clocked CPU.

I would think more along the lines, if one has an interest, and that develops into seeking answers to those questions, then that would describe someone who just may benefit from overclocking in a safe and successful method.
May 8, 2006 2:13:20 AM

Does it worth it? Yes
But you have to know EXACTLY what you're doing, or you could mess with something important, and pretty much flush your CPU down the toilet...
If you increase the CPU voltage too much (beyond a 10-15% safe margin), probably it's going to get fried. If you don't use an appropiate cooling solution, it's going to get fried. If you don't have enough power coming from your PSU, either it won't boot or (yes, you've guessed it) it's going to get fried! :D 
Again, does it worth it? Yes!
My A64 3200+ is clocked 30% above stock... from 2.0 to 2.6 GHz, putting it to the same performance level of a FX-55
The A64 3200+ is about $150, and the FX-55 about $700 (according to newegg): that's more than 4 time less! :D 
May 8, 2006 2:20:13 AM

THAT IS CORRECT! :) 

Overclocking results will vary depending on the CPU work load. In general, you won't "notice" any improvement less than 10% - with 20% being "quite noticeable".

Also, the ablity of your CPU beforehand has a big bearing on the end results.

Plus, most of the jobs you do with your CPU happen so quickly that you don't see any improvement.

You DO however, get a great improvement in the amount of heat produced, and the amount of power consumed. Expect to pay around $100 (or more) a year extra on electricty for a machine which is overclocked, and running 24/7.

Don't Diss the house heating effect - that's a bonus!
May 8, 2006 2:28:37 AM

I see your point of view.. Please see my point of view.. I was trying to make a statement that unless you know what you are doing, you can do more harm than good.

That is all

TechMaster
May 8, 2006 4:13:56 AM

I have an overclocked Opteron 175 at 2.64GHz running at 1.475 volts and idles around 39C.

Benchmarking jumped faily significant according to FutureMark results ~ 4,335 to 5,048 3DMarks06 and 9,000 to 10,100 marks using 3DMark05.

I also took measurements and made a breif analysis of the power draw consumed from this overclocked Opteron PC using Kill-a-Watt meter.
It has 4 hard drives, two Raptors in RAID 0, 2gigs (4x512) DDR, a TV Tuner, 5 fans, and a water pump! ;)  in a Lian Li mid tower case.

Based on a brief quick test, and several follow-ups, I preclude that my AMD Opteron rig when over-clocked at 2.64GHz from 2.20GHz consumes:
≤ 200 Watts at Idle
≤ 255 Watts during Boot Up
and
≤ 365 Watts at maximum load when benchmarking using 3DMark06 (at 75% efficiency, my PC is only requiring ≈ 275 watts of true power from my power supply)
Note: This is only the PC measured at outlet from the Power Supply; my LCD Monitor was not measured per these results.
May 8, 2006 1:51:08 PM

Quote:
I've played around with overclocking my P4HT 3.0Ghz all the way up to 4.0 Ghz and everything in between and all it seems to do is heat my house. I can't ever seem to find a noticeable improvement in anything except mabye a few frames faster in games. WHat exactly should I be looking for?


Well, you've just told us where did you notice an improvement: in games. Those "few frames faster" can lead to: 1)better image flowing (with less stops during the game) and/or 2)better image (better effects, higher resolution).

I did also the same with an Intel 530 and above the 3.6GHz "barrier" it was noticeable (and visible) a faster system boot, faster games (those few FPS you referred), etc.
May 8, 2006 2:30:48 PM

Um... you don't see much difference from 3.0Ghz to 4.0Ghz? that's pretty strange if I OC my old comp from 3.6Ghz to 4.0Ghz I can notice a difference. Did your memory runs at lower speed?
May 9, 2006 3:33:12 AM

From a 3.0 to a 4.0 is quite a lot! And no noticable differnce?
May 12, 2006 5:16:17 AM

Quote:
The X2-4600 is clocked at 2.2 and if you're running your X2-3800 at 2.5 why doesn't it outperform the 4600? Unless you're comparing your CPU to an overclocked 4600, you have the faster chip. Good job saving that money!

Um, a 4600 is clocked at 2.4.
May 12, 2006 12:12:37 PM

Even then, it should outperform the X2 4600, by a small margin (due to the 100 MHz difference). Both X2's have the same core, so, a higher clock means higher performance. Pure logic.
But, if it doesn't, then other things are affecting the equation. Like the mobo, or RAM timings, or almost anything else in the computer...
May 14, 2006 9:40:30 AM

Quote:
Even then, it should outperform the X2 4600, by a small margin (due to the 100 MHz difference). Both X2's have the same core, so, a higher clock means higher performance. Pure logic.
But, if it doesn't, then other things are affecting the equation. Like the mobo, or RAM timings, or almost anything else in the computer...
I just said performance similar too. Could be a little better (Probably is).
May 14, 2006 2:10:55 PM

same problem here

i got a apentium 4 630 3.0 ... overclocked to 4.0 without noticing any difference in performance !!!!!!!!!!!


i dont realy feel a boost in performace at all !!


gigabyte 955 royal motherboard
aurora case + water cooling
1 giga ram (KINGMAX)
May 14, 2006 6:39:26 PM

Quote:
same problem here

i got a apentium 4 630 3.0 ... overclocked to 4.0 without noticing any difference in performance !!!!!!!!!!!
i dont realy feel a boost in performace at all !!

gigabyte 955 royal motherboard
aurora case + water cooling
1 giga ram (KINGMAX)


You didn't say in what aplications you tested performance? Games, benchies, win load time, encoding/decoding...?
What graphics card do you have?
May 14, 2006 7:33:24 PM

Yes its worth it if the cooling is good you say no difference than your cooling is not good enough. The system will turn down volts even shut down or reboot but will turn down volts to even out the heat.
May 14, 2006 7:36:50 PM

good temps dude for a ocer buy the g7 mouse dude 2000 dpi and this can be set for 3 modes I must say it is the best I have use to this date.
May 14, 2006 7:46:18 PM

OC is worth it,the performance gain is small but it will make your sistem a bit faster,and it will got you a better bang for your buck
May 14, 2006 10:48:55 PM

There is no performance difference in all applications believe me

iam using water cooling added to my Aurora Case

by the way ... am upgrading my system now to pentium D 940

here is the picture of my case opened ... just waiting for the new processor to arrive






spec:
gigabyte motherboard 955 royal
gigabyte aurora case
gigabye water cooling
3dfx nvidia 6600 video card
1 Gb ram kingmax
old 630 processor being upgraded by tomorow to 940
Dvd wighter
raptor HD 74 Gb
May 14, 2006 11:41:01 PM

..."3dfx nvidia 6600 video card"...
He discovered the truth! The reality is that 3Dfx bought NVidia! 8O
.....
....
...
...
:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
May 14, 2006 11:45:05 PM

I would suggest downloading SiSoftware Sandra Lite and using their benchmarking modules to see the before and after of any O/Clocking you do. There should have been a very noticeable difference going from 3.0 to 4.0 just in basic use of your machine, boot up time, app loading, etc.
May 15, 2006 1:46:55 PM

6275
Date: 2006-05-15
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 2284 MHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GS
468 MHz / 1386 MHz
OS: Microsoft Windows XP
Res: 1024x768@32 bit
Active

Published

Delete

Dynamic Compare URL






Score: 6250
Date: 2006-05-14
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 2261 MHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GS
468 MHz / 1386 MHz
OS: Microsoft Windows XP
Res: 1024x768@32 bit
Active

Published

Delete

Dynamic Compare URL






Score: 5978
Date: 2006-05-14
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 2206 MHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GS
450 MHz / 1252 MHz
OS: Microsoft Windows XP
Res: 1024x768@32 bit
Active

Published

Delete

Dynamic Compare URL






Score: 5009
Date: 2005-02-26
CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) XP/MP/4 2315 MHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 6800
420 MHz / 1203 MHz
OS: Microsoft Windows XP
Res: 1024x768@32 bit
Active

Published

Delete

Dynamic Compare URL





Compare UR
here is a list of oced you can not tell me anydifferent and the app are faster in every way cpu temp with fan on speed 3, 22c cpu 33c gpu
May 26, 2006 2:20:06 AM

I just replaced my AMD 2800 with the Intel D 805 and Asus P5P800SE.
And did a repair install with Win XP Home OEM, on first boot up.
Overclocking to 3.32GHz was easy, going to 3.49GHz screwed up my Win XP and when I tried repairing Win XP again it would not activeate, said My copy of XP had been installed too many times.
It cost me $233 mail order for 805 & Asus.
I might have to spend another $90 for a new copy of XP.
Now I wish I had just spend locally $150 on AMD 3700 and ECS socket 754 motherboard.
May 26, 2006 3:42:29 AM

"Is overclocking really worth it?"

Heck Yeah !

Quote:
I've played around with overclocking my P4HT 3.0Ghz all the way up to 4.0 Ghz and everything in between and all it seems to do is heat my house.


OC in the winter, then back to stock speeds in the summer ?
May 26, 2006 4:34:49 AM

Quote:
..."3dfx nvidia 6600 video card"...
He discovered the truth! The reality is that 3Dfx bought NVidia! 8O
.....
....
...
...
:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 


So thats what nvidia did with all those left over voodoo cards that never hit the streets. They just sold them as geforce 6600.

Voodoo 6000 lives at last! :D 
May 26, 2006 4:54:11 AM

I stop at a small overclocks. I have a 4400+ @ 2.4GHz that's 200MHz over, and I'm running stock cooling, that's fine for me. I don't spend lots of extra money on overclocking, by the time you buy more expensive RAM and add extra cooling (especially watercooling) you might as well just put the extra money (usually a couple of hundred dollars) into a better processor. Not to mention the extra risk of damage overclocking presents. Say I was trying to overclock my 4400+ to 2.6GHz, by the time I spent the money on more expensive overclocking RAM (usually with higher latencys unless you want to spend lots of moner) and more on cooling I could just buy a 4800+ and get the same results with less an overclock and not have to worry about changing voltages. Now there are some people doing remarkable things with specific processors that yeild major preformance gains but those are specific situations done by real "pros" for most people I just recommend stock speeds or a mild overclock that presents no risk to the system and costs nothing extra.
May 26, 2006 11:20:51 AM

Quote:
when I tried repairing Win XP again it would not activeate, said My copy of XP had been installed too many times.

I might have to spend another $90 for a new copy of XP.

There's a phone number to ring up to reactivate XP.
Just choose the activate by phone method.
It can be used as many times as you like.
!