Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
Nearly any overclock looks great in Apple iTunes, but ASRock’s 4.6 GHz stands at the top of automatic methods. While manual overclocking always leads, the differences between boards are too small to show up in a 48-second benchmark.
When we stretch our legs for a benchmark that lasts more than a minute, Asus’ top manual-overclocking stability takes the lead. ASRock still tops the automatically-overclocked configurations.
In addition to pushing higher core clock rates, MSI's OC Genie overclocks the Core i7-2600K’s integrated GPU, boosting its Quick Sync encode performance for MediaEspresso supremacy.
We’ve noticed in past reviews that MediaConverter 7 gets less benefit from Intel's Quick Sync technology compared to MediaEspresso, and MSI’s lead shrinks accordingly.
1) It either is super conservative and therefore useless for any enthusiast.
2) It is insanely over-aggressive because it doesn't bother testing stability for more than a few minutes (if at all). So you end up with it thinking a 50% overclock is "stable" when it totally isn't.
Turned out that with all other settings as chosen by the utility the peak core could be set to its lowest value in the BIOS and still be perfectly stable. So is it just ramping up the voltage to be on the safe side?
I have downclocked my system to base settings on both the CPU and GPU because the wear on the system with OC'ing. None of the games I play, nor any of the other apps need a OC to perform well, so why place additional stress on the components when it is merely for bragging rights?
When I played with manual OC'ing I found, like this article, that there was only a marginal gain from auto settings. Plus ther is the additional risk of screwing the pooch entirely and bricking the CPU or mobo by overvolting.
Unless you are a real pro and are not risk adverse, I'd recommend that you stick with auto OC'ing, and for this, ASRock has proven to be the best.
I feel that Toms should have done some stability testing on their manual and automatic OCed Processors. They might have and just not posted their results. I am in the camp where I feel that if you can't take the hour or two to figure it all out you probably shouldn't be Overclocking. If we had a larger sample of Proccessors we have no idea how many would turn out badly.
It looks like a good tool to start off your own OC because it's probably gonna be in the ballpark, but on it's own it leaves much to be desired.