Overclocking my CPU (n00b)

2008-01-17 23:39:08

#1

Nikola Bathory: Karkand T-90 0wnage; +163|7066|Bulgaria

I am an overclocking n00b. So I wanted to share this info here and ask whether I overclocked my CPU "the right way", 'cause I don't wanna fry it.
My PC components are in my sig. The CPU runs at 2200Mhz (default). I decided to overclock it a bit.
In the BIOS, the only thing I changed was the CPU Frequency. The default was 200, I changed it to 215.
I left the CPU Multiplier at Auto (Everest showed that this "auto" is equal to 11x).
So, now the CPU is 215x11. Now it runs at 2365 Mhz. This gave me 400 more points in 3Dmark06 (before OC - ~7600, now ~8000).

So, do you see anything wrong? What temperature levels are a sign of danger for the CPU? I am using the BOX cooler, which is nothing special...
It would be cool to receive some input from someone who knows more than me about overclocking.

Last edited by Nikola Bathory (2008-01-17 23:40:57)

>>>BF3 Central<<<

2008-01-17 23:41:15

#2

Ender2309: has joined the GOP; +470|6850|USA

it looks ok. as long as its less than around 50C you're in the green (while idling). any more and you might want to tone it down a bit. it certainly could handle the temps, but higher temperatures decrease lifespan. it all seems ok.

2008-01-17 23:44:16

#3

aimless: Member; +166|6404|Texas

Now with new motherboards and all, it's harder to fry your cpu than it was a few years ago. A lot of newer boards have failsafes that will shut down the pc or refuse to boot if clock frequencies or temperature runs too high.

Google around for people who overclock the cpu you have with your stock fan.

2008-01-17 23:51:21

#4

Nikola Bathory: Karkand T-90 0wnage; +163|7066|Bulgaria

Thanks.

Ender2309 wrote:
it looks ok. as long as its less than around 50C you're in the green (while idling). any more and you might want to tone it down a bit.

When idle, the temperature is below 50C, but when I run Crysis it's about 55C.

Probably I need a better cooler?

>>>BF3 Central<<<

2008-01-17 23:53:15

#5

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6773|N. Ireland

Try not to stray over doing 10-15 increments in the FSB / Core clock - no matter how tempting..

2008-01-18 00:10:36

#6

aimless: Member; +166|6404|Texas

Nikola Bathory wrote:
Thanks.

Ender2309 wrote:
it looks ok. as long as its less than around 50C you're in the green (while idling). any more and you might want to tone it down a bit.
When idle, the temperature is below 50C, but when I run Crysis it's about 55C.

Probably I need a better cooler?

Make 60°C your absolute limit. With your current temps, I think it's about as high as you can go with your current fan.

2008-01-18 00:30:47

#7

Nikola Bathory: Karkand T-90 0wnage; +163|7066|Bulgaria

Yes, I won't try to overclock it more than this, I just want to make sure that keeping the current level of overclock is safe.

>>>BF3 Central<<<

2008-01-18 00:37:09

#8

**LiLp-DeFiNeD: Banned; +54|6434|Vancouver, BC, Canada

When I did mine, I managed to crank a stock AMD 4000+ 2.1 GHZ to a 2.63ish.
And it runs stable, doesn't get much hotter than it used to, a little bit of a performance increase, havn't gotten around to downloading the 600 fkin meg 3DMark file.

I don;t remember how much I cranked it by, but I think I went from 200 to 250 on the clock Freq.

2008-01-18 01:38:04

#9

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6477|Winland

Those temps you're talking about, with 60C as "absolute limit" is bullshit.

Any CPU can handle and perform good at 70C. I've ran benchmarks with my CPU running at ~50C and 80C. When it went past 80C, I started noticing some performance decrease due to the throttling that's triggered at 80.

I'd say 70-75C as the maximum acceptable temperature. I've ran my 1600+ between 65 and 75C for two years now, almost 24/7, and it's running just as fast as when I first got it. Same with my P4 3GHz, but for three years.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2008-01-18 07:01:58

#10

Ender2309: has joined the GOP; +470|6850|USA

Freezer7Pro wrote:
Those temps you're talking about, with 60C as "absolute limit" is bullshit.

Any CPU can handle and perform good at 70C. I've ran benchmarks with my CPU running at ~50C and 80C. When it went past 80C, I started noticing some performance decrease due to the throttling that's triggered at 80.

I'd say 70-75C as the maximum acceptable temperature. I've ran my 1600+ between 65 and 75C for two years now, almost 24/7, and it's running just as fast as when I first got it. Same with my P4 3GHz, but for three years.

we're talking about idle temps dude. if its idling at 70-75 you're up shit creek, and in my experience idling at 50 usually puts you around 70-75 in warm weather.

2008-01-18 10:18:53

#11

aimless: Member; +166|6404|Texas

Ender2309 wrote:
Freezer7Pro wrote:
Those temps you're talking about, with 60C as "absolute limit" is bullshit.

Any CPU can handle and perform good at 70C. I've ran benchmarks with my CPU running at ~50C and 80C. When it went past 80C, I started noticing some performance decrease due to the throttling that's triggered at 80.

I'd say 70-75C as the maximum acceptable temperature. I've ran my 1600+ between 65 and 75C for two years now, almost 24/7, and it's running just as fast as when I first got it. Same with my P4 3GHz, but for three years.
we're talking about idle temps dude. if its idling at 70-75 you're up shit creek, and in my experience idling at 50 usually puts you around 70-75 in warm weather.

Exactly. Plus with temps, it's safer to play it low.

2008-01-18 10:57:32

#12

steelie34: pub hero!; +603|6661|the land of bourbon

this is totally off-topic (sorry nikola) but what is the deal with overclocking? i thought it all started back in the day when real tech geeks were trying to squeeze as much or more processing as they could out of their hardware, only because they were making breakthroughs in processing that the hardware couldn't keep up with. They figured out how to really rig some crazy ideas to make the hardware faster, usually with direct modifications to the boards and chips themselves. it seems nowadays that overclocking has become a "fad." i mean, using software to overclock just seems like a gimmick to me. if the hardware can handle an "overclock" it should just be maxed out, not needing some cheesy software to make the clock cycle faster or whatever.

/rant

https://bf3s.com/sigs/36e1d9e36ae924048a933db90fb05bb247fe315e.png

2008-01-18 11:00:43

#13

aimless: Member; +166|6404|Texas

steelie34 wrote:
this is totally off-topic (sorry nikola) but what is the deal with overclocking? i thought it all started back in the day when real tech geeks were trying to squeeze as much or more processing as they could out of their hardware, only because they were making breakthroughs in processing that the hardware couldn't keep up with. They figured out how to really rig some crazy ideas to make the hardware faster, usually with direct modifications to the boards and chips themselves. it seems nowadays that overclocking has become a "fad." i mean, using software to overclock just seems like a gimmick to me. if the hardware can handle an "overclock" it should just be maxed out, not needing some cheesy software to make the clock cycle faster or whatever.

/rant

I overclock for benchmarks, I dunno, it just seems like fun. You try and get the most out of your cpu. The reasons manufacturers don't sell their cpu's maxed out is because it would require a better heatsink and fan, which would make more noise and cost more money; the temperatures would also be higher.

2008-01-18 11:04:20

#14

steelie34: pub hero!; +603|6661|the land of bourbon

aimless wrote:
steelie34 wrote:
this is totally off-topic (sorry nikola) but what is the deal with overclocking? i thought it all started back in the day when real tech geeks were trying to squeeze as much or more processing as they could out of their hardware, only because they were making breakthroughs in processing that the hardware couldn't keep up with. They figured out how to really rig some crazy ideas to make the hardware faster, usually with direct modifications to the boards and chips themselves. it seems nowadays that overclocking has become a "fad." i mean, using software to overclock just seems like a gimmick to me. if the hardware can handle an "overclock" it should just be maxed out, not needing some cheesy software to make the clock cycle faster or whatever.

/rant
I overclock for benchmarks, I dunno, it just seems like fun. You try and get the most out of your cpu. The reasons manufacturers don't sell their cpu's maxed out is because it would require a better heatsink and fan, which would make more noise and cost more money; the temperatures would also be higher.

good point, but then they should just make them with better heatsinks and fans and shit. guess the race for cheap hardware has had an overall negative impact on quality...

2008-01-18 11:16:18

#15

aimless: Member; +166|6404|Texas

steelie34 wrote:
aimless wrote:
steelie34 wrote:
this is totally off-topic (sorry nikola) but what is the deal with overclocking? i thought it all started back in the day when real tech geeks were trying to squeeze as much or more processing as they could out of their hardware, only because they were making breakthroughs in processing that the hardware couldn't keep up with. They figured out how to really rig some crazy ideas to make the hardware faster, usually with direct modifications to the boards and chips themselves. it seems nowadays that overclocking has become a "fad." i mean, using software to overclock just seems like a gimmick to me. if the hardware can handle an "overclock" it should just be maxed out, not needing some cheesy software to make the clock cycle faster or whatever.

/rant
I overclock for benchmarks, I dunno, it just seems like fun. You try and get the most out of your cpu. The reasons manufacturers don't sell their cpu's maxed out is because it would require a better heatsink and fan, which would make more noise and cost more money; the temperatures would also be higher.
good point, but then they should just make them with better heatsinks and fans and shit. guess the race for cheap hardware has had an overall negative impact on quality...

But most of the people who use computers aren't hardcore gamers or benchmarkers or overclockers, and they don't need all the power muchless a better heatsink/fan. For common people. all they want is speed and quietness. And today's processors already have the speed, the little hs and fan keep it quiet.

2008-01-18 11:29:40

#16

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6477|Winland

aimless wrote:
steelie34 wrote:
aimless wrote:

I overclock for benchmarks, I dunno, it just seems like fun. You try and get the most out of your cpu. The reasons manufacturers don't sell their cpu's maxed out is because it would require a better heatsink and fan, which would make more noise and cost more money; the temperatures would also be higher.
good point, but then they should just make them with better heatsinks and fans and shit. guess the race for cheap hardware has had an overall negative impact on quality...
But most of the people who use computers aren't hardcore gamers or benchmarkers or overclockers, and they don't need all the power muchless a better heatsink/fan. For common people. all they want is speed and quietness. And today's processors already have the speed, the little hs and fan keep it quiet.

Overclocking is to get more performance out of your computer. Heavy apps will run faster.

Manufacturers don't sell their hardware maxed out, because that's the way they make money. If they'd max it out, the E6400 and E6600 CPUs would be the same. Same with E6550 and E6750. The multipler lock is there to make the CPUs different, even if they're basically the same thing.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2008-01-18 11:43:55

#17

Lucien: Fantasma Parastasie; +1,451|6933

I believe this makes more sense: top of the line hardware gets made, but far from all of the completed products run as fast as they're supposed to. Make thousands of 7800gtx's, and after a while you can start selling 7800gt, gs, etc. They're basically just failed versions of what they're supposed to be.

2008-01-21 04:02:41

#18

Nikola Bathory: Karkand T-90 0wnage; +163|7066|Bulgaria

Lucien wrote:
Make thousands of 7800gtx's, and after a while you can start selling 7800gt, gs, etc. They're basically just failed versions of what they're supposed to be.

Not failed! Simply less powerfull for less money! It's good to leave some choice for users, not have only 2 models: one shit (and very cheap) and the other GREAT (but very very expensive). That's what I think.

Anyway, the CPU box cooler is shit. I will replace it in March (I guess). Don't have time before that.

>>>BF3 Central<<<

BF2S Forums Overclocking my CPU (n00b)

Ender2309 wrote:

Nikola Bathory wrote:

Ender2309 wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Ender2309 wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

aimless wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

aimless wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

aimless wrote:

steelie34 wrote:

aimless wrote:

Lucien wrote:

Board footer