Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Overclocking Questions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Overclocking did a lot for me, and it's perfectly stable.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by element*381
      Overclocking did a lot for me, and it's perfectly stable.
      I can't tell you how many times I've been at a computer parts store and seen someone return a part or a system because someone in the home improperly OC'd it and fried the cpu or video card. At least most mobos come standard now with overclocking utilities and safeguards.

      I tried OCing my system when I built it. I noticed an extremely negligible difference in the benchmarks. I myself could not tell the system was any faster. Oh, it was stable, but what was the point if I saw no apparent gain in performance?

      From looking at the equipment listed in your sig, and looking at your 3D Mark 03/05 scores, overclocking didn't help that much. I've seen similar systems get those types of scores at normal clockspeeds. As a matter of fact, my A64 3500+, with 1GB of Mushkin 2-2-2-6 ram, and a Radeon X800 XL blows your scores out of the water by almost 40 percent. And that is with my system running at stock speeds. Where's the real gain in performance versus premature component failure? Sure, if you have the money, and love to tinker with this sort of stuff, and don't intend to keep components for more than six months, go ahead and OC. That's fine. But I wish people would stop telling complete newbies that they need to overclock their systems.

      If your system, at stock speeds, is not running up to par in games like UT2004, etc, then overclocking is not going to resolve your issues. If your average framerate in UT2004, for example, is only 40 fps, overclocking your system might net you an extra 5 fps. Even if you could magically get a 10 fps increase, would it be worth putting your system at risk?

      Edit: Fixed a couple of typos. Yeah, I'm loony that way.

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Crotale
        From looking at the equipment listed in your sig, and looking at your 3D Mark 03/05 scores, overclocking didn't help that much. I've seen similar systems get those types of scores at normal clockspeeds.
        I can't speak for element*381, but I have the same CPU at a much lower overclock (I need a better PSU), and I can say that it most definitely has helped my system. Framerate isn't even necessarily the most obvious case of this; everything is just more responsive, I can do more things at the same time without freezeups, etc. Besides, what do you mean "similar" systems? Even the slightest hardware or software difference can have a big impact.
        As a matter of fact, my A64 3500+, with 1GB of Mushkin 2-2-2-6 ram, and a Radeon X800 XL blows your scores out of the water by almost 40 percent. And that is with my system running at stock speeds.
        It very well should, you have superior equipment. However, consider that not everyone is able/wants to spend as much on this equipment, and that when done competently it's easily possible to overclock safely.
        But I wish peole would stop telling comlete newbies that they need to overclock their systems.
        A valid point.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by neoflame
          I can't speak for element*381, but I have the same CPU at a much lower overclock (I need a better PSU), and I can say that it most definitely has helped my system. Framerate isn't even necessarily the most obvious case of this; everything is just more responsive, I can do more things at the same time without freezeups, etc. Besides, what do you mean "similar" systems? Even the slightest hardware or software difference can have a big impact.
          Good point. What I meant by similar systems was an A64 3000 with a 6600GT, at stock speeds.

          It very well should, you have superior equipment. However, consider that not everyone is able/wants to spend as much on this equipment, and that when done competently it's easily possible to overclock safely.
          True, but the problem is that many newbies to overclocking, and computing for that matter, try to overclock or tweak their systems with little to no knowledge of what they are doing. To top this off, they get little tidbits of info from so-called experts. These tidbits are dangerous, especially in the hands of the unknowing. The biggest and most important thing for ANYONE to tell someone who is new to overclocking is this, "DO YOUR HOMEWORK!". I don't care if overclcoking your system cured world hunger and brought balance to the galaxy, please, for the love of all that is sacred (computers), make sure you remind people to do their research before overclocking anything. I can't stress this enough.

          Comment


            #20
            thats why i came here and to get info on sites that can explain oc more thorouly but only 1 person has given me a website others been giving sites to download the programs.

            Comment


              #21
              Are you sure about that? IIRC in many databases I've checked that weren't illicit or heavily modified in process, few 6600 GT's have broken 4,000 3DMarks without some overclocking done to the actual card, even if an FX processor was backing it. This is because, in general, 3DMark is a GPU-oriented synthetic benchmark series with the exception of 3DMark'01SE. It's impressive for the small/marginal overclocking I did on the 6600 GT.. I've seen people on higher watercooled overclocks get less of a score. Plus, don't forget that your X800 XL is a sixteen pixel-pipelined card with six vertex shaders and 256-bit memory bus depth (IIRC). It's doing tons more work per clock, yet at 20% less of a core speed it's getting roughly 27% less of double the work I would do at stock speeds (I get about 3700 3DMarks stock for both components). Ultimately I win by an ever so slight edge in the specification : performance spectrum all-around, from low-end to high-end. But that's besides the point. I don't need a $300 video card or $150+ RAM to get excellent performance. I paid very little for my setup.

              UT2004 will benefit heavily off of a thorough CPU overclock. Note that my maximum FPS did not benefit significantly from my overclock. However, my minimum FPS improved by more than 20 frames per second! That's a difference from a somewhat choppy and noticeably jumpy 30-90 FPS to a solid 60-90 FPS at all times (online). Minimum FPS > Maximum FPS.

              Overclocking used to be dangerous way back when. Now, when hardware is constructed to last 8-10 years, many overclockers see the 2-5 years of component lifespan lost as a worthwhile tradeoff if they can pull off a significant overclock. It's hard to mess up on an overclock because if you actually make any changes that would be foolish, the system will often not POST especially on a good motherboard. Thus, you can reset and try again by clearing the CMOS.

              I'm fifteen and went straight into the BIOS without the slightest notion of how to overclock and what to do, and on my first try I got to 2.25 GHz easily. In a few days, I got to where I was/am now, so it's easy to learn and get the hang of it. I'd probably only be sacrificing the lower number of years (maybe 2) because I left stock voltages for everything. I'll be upgrading in less than those 6-8 years anyway.

              As for 'added heat' and all that nonsense, I'd like to add that my CPU right now is running 1'C less than my case temperature (31'C/32'C) and my GPU is running at a fairly cool 40'C. This is on totally stock cooling with the exception of Arctic Silver 5 on the CPU HSF.

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by element*381


                <snip of mostly valid comments>

                As for 'added heat' and all that nonsense, I'd like to add that my CPU right now is running 1'C less than my case temperature (31'C/32'C) and my GPU is running at a fairly cool 40'C.
                Your system isn't giving you proper readings on your CPU temps.

                Don't get me wrong... they're probably just fine and well within specs, but a normally configured system will not have a CPU temp that's lower than ambient (your case temp).

                My temps seemed a bit high on my MSI K8N Neo2 with a 3500+ both at stock and overclocked speeds. They weren't bad, but they were a tad high. It turned out to be a flaw in the way the K8N read the temps and a bios flash brought the readings back to what I considered normal. Funny thing is, I felt better about it even though I knew that nothing had really changed except the way the mobo was giving me the readings. :noob: Point of the story being that your mobo could be (and apparently is) giving you lower-than-normal readings for your CPU temp.

                Nice OC BTW. Out of curiosity, what are your memory timings and did you have to raise core or memory voltage?

                Comment


                  #23
                  Yes, element, that's how most of us did it, you learn more as you go.

                  ( on a side note your cpu temp cant be lower than the ambient temperature, it's probably just a thermal sensor that's off a wee bit, anywho )

                  I find overclocking very very useful, hence my name, when it comes down to it, you can buy an athlon 64 3000+ for $150 and get the equivalent work out of it as you would for a $1000 FX-55 processor, that is why we overclockers exist, much like back in the day when an athlon xp 2500+ could push 2.4ghz without breaking a sweat, at the time that was faster than the 3200+ and a LOT cheaper.....even further back the old celeron 300a which costed $500 less than the P2 450 yet totally kicked it's *** at 600mhz....it's been a hobby of mine for many years and i've saved many a dollar by doing so.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    No, it's right, it's just that (I theorize) the ambient sensor of the motherboard is being measured near the NorthBridge/NF4/Video Card area I presume, thereby 'adding' to the measured ambient temperatures. External thermal diodes have read the same for the CPU. IIRC the NF4 chipset runs as hot if not hotter than CPU's in some cases anyway.

                    Whatever's standard for Corsair Value.. 2.5-3-3-8 I believe. 1.4 Vcore, 2.7V RAM.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by element*381
                      Are you sure about that? IIRC in many databases I've checked that weren't illicit or heavily modified in process, few 6600 GT's have broken 4,000 3DMarks without some overclocking done to the actual card, even if an FX processor was backing it. This is because, in general, 3DMark is a GPU-oriented synthetic benchmark series with the exception of 3DMark'01SE. It's impressive for the small/marginal overclocking I did on the 6600 GT.. I've seen people on higher watercooled overclocks get less of a score. Plus, don't forget that your X800 XL is a sixteen pixel-pipelined card with six vertex shaders and 256-bit memory bus depth (IIRC). It's doing tons more work per clock, yet at 20% less of a core speed it's getting roughly 27% less of double the work I would do at stock speeds (I get about 3700 3DMarks stock for both components). Ultimately I win by an ever so slight edge in the specification : performance spectrum all-around, from low-end to high-end. But that's besides the point. I don't need a $300 video card or $150+ RAM to get excellent performance. I paid very little for my setup.
                      I paid a little more for my system that I originally planned, but after doing some research, I felt the investment was well worth it. My last system was a XP 3200 with a Radeon 9600 XT. Sure, the machine ran fine and I got "decent" framerates out of it (no real complaints) but it seemed to be a bit less powerful than I needed. So, when I built this one, I kinda went all out. I didn't want to feel like upgraging again for a few years.

                      About the 6600 GT scores, yes, I've seen a few alleged "stock" ones get close to 4000. You posted that your was 41xx.

                      UT2004 will benefit heavily off of a thorough CPU overclock. Note that my maximum FPS did not benefit significantly from my overclock. However, my minimum FPS improved by more than 20 frames per second! That's a difference from a somewhat choppy and noticeably jumpy 30-90 FPS to a solid 60-90 FPS at all times (online). Minimum FPS > Maximum FPS.
                      Fair enough. I'll eat a little crow on that one.

                      Overclocking used to be dangerous way back when. Now, when hardware is constructed to last 8-10 years, many overclockers see the 2-5 years of component lifespan lost as a worthwhile tradeoff if they can pull off a significant overclock. It's hard to mess up on an overclock because if you actually make any changes that would be foolish, the system will often not POST especially on a good motherboard. Thus, you can reset and try again by clearing the CMOS.
                      True.

                      I'm fifteen and went straight into the BIOS without the slightest notion of how to overclock and what to do, and on my first try I got to 2.25 GHz easily. In a few days, I got to where I was/am now, so it's easy to learn and get the hang of it. I'd probably only be sacrificing the lower number of years (maybe 2) because I left stock voltages for everything. I'll be upgrading in less than those 6-8 years anyway.
                      You have a mobo that came with OCing utilities. Not all mobos come with that. The el cheapo boards still don't. And you have to consider those people that buy Dells and Gateways. Some kid tries to OC his dad's Dell and screws it up. You think Dell will just send them a replacement system for free?

                      As for 'added heat' and all that nonsense, I'd like to add that my CPU right now is running 1'C less than my case temperature (31'C/32'C) and my GPU is running at a fairly cool 40'C. This is on totally stock cooling with the exception of Arctic Silver 5 on the CPU HSF.
                      Like Folk said, check your BIOS. Your motherboard manufacturer should have newer versions avaialble. You may need to flash it. Many mobos, including my previous one, have temp reporting issues that are later corrected in a newer version of the BIOS.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by element*381
                        No, it's right, it's just that (I theorize) the ambient sensor of the motherboard is being measured near the NorthBridge/NF4/Video Card area I presume, thereby 'adding' to the measured ambient temperatures.
                        Your theory needs work.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          man im learning alot and dood what u mean by his story needs work.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Yeah, I dont see a need for overclocking that.

                            There are really 2 fine lines that divide overclockers

                            #1. People who cant afford decent hardware so they need to make up for it

                            #2. People who already have the best possible and think that they are so much cooler with a higher benchmark score..


                            Seeing as you dont fall into either of these categories I think you'll be just fine with what you have

                            Comment


                              #29
                              ^^ har har har

                              that is soo true i fall sadly under no 1


                              on a note i never have touched the voltages area because im **** scared to. For the simple reason put the voltage up and it will burn out.

                              How far do i know how to push my voltages fsb speed etc no probs i just rese my bios, but voltages


                              *cringe

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by Killavirus
                                ^^ har har har

                                that is soo true i fall sadly under no 1


                                on a note i never have touched the voltages area because im **** scared to. For the simple reason put the voltage up and it will burn out.

                                How far do i know how to push my voltages fsb speed etc no probs i just rese my bios, but voltages


                                *cringe
                                Depends on the processor, i'd look online at a few sites and see about what averages for vcore's during overclocks people are getting, usually it's safe to say that if your computer restarts midgame or something it's due to there not being enough power going to the processor, in this case you'd up your vcore by .25 and try it again, you can continually do this until at a certain point you'll raise your vcore by only .25 by the temperrature will jump drastically....dont go any further when you get there and i'd go back a bit just to be safe, but it's easier to just read some reviews, see what vcore they run it at while overclocked and then stay in the ballpark

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X