BF2S Forums A 56€ CPU and me

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

You think the guys working at Intel think their thermal specs are jokes?

No. You just don't seem to understand them. Even slightly.

Those thermal specs (Tcase) are for when the CPU is running at max TDP. When beyond that those temps drop. Rapidly.

.Sup wrote:

Chocolate bananas anyone?

http://shrani.si/f/1I/yY/507cKcP/slika-019.jpg

This thread is now about chocolate bananas.

.Sup wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

.Sup wrote:

Chocolate bananas anyone?

http://shrani.si/f/1I/yY/507cKcP/slika-019.jpg

This thread is now about chocolate bananas.

I just ate the whole box of them while reading replies in this thread. Anyone else crazy about chocolate bananas?

Never been a fan of them. Chocolate strawberries, though. Yumm! <3

.Sup wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

.Sup wrote:

I just ate the whole box of them while reading replies in this thread. Anyone else crazy about chocolate bananas?

Never been a fan of them. Chocolate strawberries, though. Yumm! <3

Real strawberries in chocolate or just strawberry flavored?

Mmm I'm Hungry

We don't get chocolate bananas here, have to make them yourself

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

this derailing made me hungry, going to get kebab+coke.

anyway running at 1.6125vcore atm. I might as well keep it there for this day. or use 1.65vcore. crunching orthos whole time to show IT IS STABLE and still alive...

I don't think anyone is saying that high volt+temp is gonna instagib your cpu in a day

Aries_37 wrote:

We don't get chocolate bananas here, have to make them yourself

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

this derailing made me hungry, going to get kebab+coke.

anyway running at 1.6125vcore atm. I might as well keep it there for this day. or use 1.65vcore. crunching orthos whole time to show IT IS STABLE and still alive...

I don't think anyone is saying that high volt+temp is gonna instagib your cpu in a day

I will use it for weeks if necessary then...
Like I have said before... I don't care if it lasts only 9 years and not 10 it would at stock. it is now 70% faster than it was at stock. A 56€ cpu.
Anyway it won't die in many many years even tho I kept these voltages. I know a guy with 1.65V and E2160 at 3.6ghz and he has used it for a year now. not showing any signs of degradation. And he is using air cooling.

Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2008-05-04 07:16:52)

Bertster7 wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

Aries_37 wrote:

We don't get chocolate bananas here, have to make them yourself


I don't think anyone is saying that high volt+temp is gonna instagib your cpu in a day

I will use it for weeks if necessary then...

It's not particularly likely to fail at those settings in anything less than 18 months. That doesn't mean it's good for it.

then you agree 1.5V and 67c is not likely to break it for years?

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

I will use it for weeks if necessary then...

It's not particularly likely to fail at those settings in anything less than 18 months. That doesn't mean it's good for it.

then you agree 1.5V and 67c is not likely to break it for years?

For an E2160? It's not likely too, but might. It'd be at the absolute upper limit for tolerances - which isn't a good idea unless you have a tightly controlled environment so fluctuating ambient temps are not an issue.

For the majority of C2D CPUs it is likely to.

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

then you agree 1.5V and 67c is not likely to break it for years?

For an E2160? It's not likely too, but might. It'd be at the absolute upper limit for tolerances - which isn't a good idea unless you have a tightly controlled environment so fluctuating ambient temps are not an issue.

For the majority of C2D CPUs it is likely to.

you mean the older E6xxx series? I never said 70c is good for them. Like even Intel says, 61c is the limit for them. Just these E2180 and newer C2Ds.

You, perhaps not. But lots of people in this thread have. You've also been quite ambiguous with sweeping references to C2D.

(Look at the point in the thread that I started posting that these temps were too hot and look at the temps people have been posting for their overclocks - not very sensible if you ask me)

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

and yeah of course even room temp will eventually kill any pice of silicon when time goes on. And there are always some manufacturing errors taht migh kill your cpu even at stock. You never know...

You never know. That's the whole issue. Anything that increases strain on the CPU is bad. Temps beyond a certain point DO put added strain on the transistor gates which means they are more likely to fail. Anything that increases the chance of your CPU randomly failing should be avoided. That's why I consider 70C to be too hot. Intel base the clocks they restrict CPUs to on probability calculations. There is a margin of error included in these and Intel clocks the CPUs to the bottom end of this margin of error (sometimes even lower). Responsible long-term overclocking should not exceed the other end of the margin of error.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2008-05-04 07:39:03)

I think you should listen to bert. It is pretty basic physics tbh. Running a CPU at 60+ while shorten its life time.

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

ye but sometimes it is worth it. Hell, you can get 3 of the E2180 for price of one E6850. Even if one fails after lets say, 4 years. you had the same performance for 1/3 money. the cpu would be badly obsolete by that time and should be replaced anyway.

It's like you guys haven't even been reading the content of my posts.

Bertster7 wrote:

Of course if you're spending very little on a CPU and OCing it to achieve massively improved performance, then a probable, significant decrease in your CPU life is not a big factor when it comes to getting bang for your buck.

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

ye but sometimes it is worth it. Hell, you can get 3 of the E2180 for price of one E6850. Even if one fails after lets say, 4 years. you had the same performance for 1/3 money. the cpu would be badly obsolete by that time and should be replaced anyway.

It's like you guys haven't even been reading the content of my posts.

Bertster7 wrote:

Of course if you're spending very little on a CPU and OCing it to achieve massively improved performance, then a probable, significant decrease in your CPU life is not a big factor when it comes to getting bang for your buck.

Yep I agree most of ur points on the first posts. I was a day off and I think I missed that. after that this whole thread might have been derailed because of misunderstandings?

Quite possibly.....

lol

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

Vilham wrote:

I think you should listen to bert. It is pretty basic physics tbh. Running a CPU at 60+ while shorten its life time.

It depends sooo much on the CPU. I have advanced physics as well. Having it on the shelf will reduce its lifetime as well. but is that 10% off the lifetime so bad for over 50% more performance? no one else except freezer here is going to be using same cpu for +5 years. And if there is he doesn't need the OC in the first place.

Yeah i agree, it shortens its lifetime less than the boost you get. Thats not what im suggesting, im just saying high temps DO shorten lifetime, its just up to you if you think that is worth the bonus calculations your getting.