Why do you overclock?

[PeteRoy]

I have a Core i7 920 CPU, I been using it since it was new in 2008 and to this day I never felt I needed more power out of any game.

I see many threads in this forum about overclocking new CPU such as the 4770 and etc and I think whats the point of overclocking these CPU?

So I ask each one of you, why do you overclock the CPU? Can you say the reason you do it?

 

[nwo]

Because you can. It's fun and hard to turn down a free performance boost.

I also OC because of gaming...

I'd definitely OC your CPU since the first generation i7s have extremely low stock clock speeds and you can easily get a GHz OC out of them which will make a big difference.

 

[coffeejunkee]

1. Games: fps usually don't need much cpu power but some rts do. 4.5GHz 3570K still not fast enough for big Supcom game.

2. Video encoding: quite a bit faster at 4.5 compared to 3.6.

3. It's fun for nerds.

 

[Yuriman]

Currently I'm running a very heavily modded Minecraft server, and the single-core performance of my 4.6GHz 3570K is not high enough to prevent regular hiccups.

In Guild Wars 2 I see almost linear scaling of framerate when overclocking - and I suspect my chip has almost 100% higher single-core performance than yours presently.

 

[NTMBK]

Because the ladies can't resist a 5GHz water cooled OC. Obviously.

 

[Galatian]

Several reason. For one I do play Civilization 5 a lot and I can't stand turn times in late game. Faster CPU = faster turn time. Also I do encode my Blu-Ray using Handbrake, although with the newest nightly and Quicksync support, overclocking is not that important anymore. Finally it's also about efficiency. I did an offset overclock (+ 0,1 V on my i5-3570K) which allowed me to have all sleepstates and EIST active. Now my CPU is actually faster in the race to idle, which means that although it's using more energy under full load, it will finish the task faster and can thus idle sooner to save energy.

 

[DeathReborn]

Primarily for more performance but also to test the limits of my hardware. It's always nice to know your chip can push further when you really need the extra grunt.

 

[Deders]

I've found that it can make the difference in some games between being playable and jerky especially if it's at full detail.

One example is Arkham City with PhysX on high, It recommended a both a 570 and 460 for best performance but I was able to get very playable framerates with my single 560TI, but only when the CPU was overclocked.

 

[Matt1970]

It's fun and hard to turn down a free performance boost.

This.

 

[Squeetard]

A few simple tweaks and your $400 cpu is running faster than a $1000 cpu.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

This.

Well there's that.

Then, as someone said: the answer the lawyer gives to Nicholas Cage in "8MM" for the question "Why did the multi-zillionaire pay $1-million to Dino Velvet and John Gandolfini for a snuff movie? Because . . . he can . . . "

Truth be told, I have to reassess everything I've been doing for the last nine years with over-clocking. It may be that Ivy Bridge, Haswell and beyond really spells the "slow death of overclocking," because the only solutions at 22nm lithography or less are "energy-expensive."

It's become such a habit with me, that when I think I should build another computer just for practical reasons, I have to have the ability to overclock the CPU, so thus -- "K" chips are mandatory.

Perhaps I shouldn't, but I do . . . and I will . . .

 

[SPBHM]

it's not free when you have to pay more for specific "K" models and chipsets,
it used to be kind of free back in the pre Sandy Bridge days, but not exactly.

 

[BrightCandle]

One of the main things I do is program. I use languages that sometimes take large amounts of time to compile, I have test suites that takes hours to run, I have programs that can use 10,000 threads and take weeks to give me answers. When you are trying to create software for the world in 10 years time, applications that no one would reasonably run today, but in the future I hope will be possible, then you need as much computing power as you can get.

Its actually far simpiler than that, I can see the performance difference in windows let alone anywhere else. There is an appreciable difference in basic OS performance by overclocking, its obvious everywhere. I hate when computers feel slow, and all computers today show all the signs of being too slow for the activities I do with them. We can dress them up with pretty progress bars and other nonsense but none of it makes the activity I want done happen fast enough.

I just don't buy into the fast enough argument, mainly because I have 2 software ideas that only work with at least 10,000x the computing power on the desktop than we have today.

 

[tolis626]

Wait,I don't understand...There are people here who don't overclock?!

Seriously,though?As others stated already.It's fun and it's more performance for free (Well,almost.It may result to a little higher electricity bill but meh..).I also think it's kinda addictive.I can't imagine buying a PC and not overclocking...something.Hell,I'd overclock the case LEDs if I could!Not to mention that I've been overclocking my phones' CPUs and (When possible) GPUs for the past 3 years.To this day,nothing can beat HTC's Desire HD (And other Snapdragon based phones of the time) in overclocking.It was 1GHz stock,could overclock to a little over 2GHz quite frequently and didn't burn your hands.100% overclocking.There aren't many people who can say they've done that.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

it's not free when you have to pay more for specific "K" models and chipsets,
it used to be kind of free back in the pre Sandy Bridge days, but not exactly.

We have to be Intel's favorite lemmings. THEY know where this is going; we don't look that far ahead. First, we'd only get locked processors. the mobo makers gravitated toward making the FSB overclockable. Then Intel gave us the "K" chips, charging an extra margin.

See -- they know we have a habit. But now, the lithography for IB and Haswell with its thermal implications makes it more difficult to OC. "K" or no "K."

 

[nwo]

it's not free when you have to pay more for specific "K" models and chipsets,
it used to be kind of free back in the pre Sandy Bridge days, but not exactly.

You had to invest more $$$ into faster RAM so you have more room to OC the FSB, which would likely cost you more than an unlocked K version does nowadays.

OC motherboard chipsets are mainstream, if you want to save some $$$ on the non OC chipset, you can... but you won't get all the features, and I'm not just talking about OCing.

 

[SPBHM]

You had to invest more $$$ into faster RAM so you have more room to OC the FSB, which would likely cost you more than an unlocked K version does nowadays.

OC motherboard chipsets are mainstream, if you want to save some $$$ on the non OC chipset, you can... but you won't get all the features, and I'm not just talking about OCing.

only if you wanted,
overclocking FSB 66 CPU with standard 100 or 133 ram didn't require any other investment, as overclocking 478/775 with 1:1 memory, or k8-Phenom with higher HTT but lower memory divider.

thing is, you could overclock with H55, G41, G31, 945GC and so on... now you only can with Z87, no H87, no B85, no H81, the same for the CPUs,

without the unlocked multi as a factor, you probably would buy an i5 4430 and overclock it, not the 4670, and you could also go with a cheaper MB, so in the the end the price difference can be a lot bigger than what you are thinking.

 

[tweakboy]

Were all sick, we have COCD. computer obsessive compulsive disorder.

 

[Puppies04]

I have an unlocked CPU a mid-high level mobo and after market cooling. The real question should be why not OC.

 

[2is]

I may or may not purchase an unlocked chip for my next system, which will likely be skylake based. With Intel limiting some instruction sets to only the locked versions, I'm going to wait and see what OC results people are getting. If it's promising, I'll get an unlocked chip. If not, i'll get the regular one and have the benefit of the added instructions.

 

[PeteRoy]

I have an unlocked CPU a mid-high level mobo and after market cooling. The real question should be why not OC.

I actually have more reasons to not OC:

1. More reliable computing experience, less BSOD, etc
2. More green to environment, less power
3. No need to tinker with BIOS, settings, etc.
4. Not much benefit for more than 90% of computer usage which is browsing, youtube, email, etc.

 

[nwo]

only if you wanted,
without the unlocked multi as a factor, you probably would buy an i5 4430 and overclock it, not the 4670, and you could also go with a cheaper MB, so in the the end the price difference can be a lot bigger than what you are thinking.

That's one way of putting it. But, if you plan on selling your locked CPU/mobo, you can expect more depreciation as well as less interest, maybe not on ebay, but particularly on tech forums. If someone is willing to go out of their way to save a few $ on used hardware, odds are they know what overclocking is and are willing to pay the insignificant premium for it.

Overclocking has become so simple that it's mainstream now. Nobody will turn down a 20-40% clock speed increase for a fraction of the cost compared to a higher (stock) clocked CPU.

I actually have more reasons to not OC:

1. More reliable computing experience, less BSOD, etc
2. More green to environment, less power
3. No need to tinker with BIOS, settings, etc.
4. Not much benefit for more than 90% of computer usage which is browsing, youtube, email, etc.

1. You must be doing it wrong. If BSOD happens often, you either tweak your settings manually or lower the OC. Simple as that.
2. Sure, I agree. However, 30-50 additional Watts is not going to save a lot of trees. That's less than the power of one standard light bulb.
3. That's what UEFI BIOS is for, and just about every motherboard comes with a utility that will either automatically overclock for you or let you overclock on the fly in windows.
4. 90% of your usage might be non-CPU intensive, but how many other people can say the same? I know I sure as heck can't. My computer usage is 100% CPU dependent.

 

[2is]

That's one way of putting it. But, if you plan on selling your locked CPU/mobo, you can expect more depreciation as well as less interest, maybe not on ebay, but particularly on tech forums. If someone is willing to go out of their way to save a few $ on used hardware, odds are they know what overclocking is and are willing to pay the insignificant premium for it.

Overclocking has become so simple that it's mainstream now. Nobody will turn down a 20-40% clock speed increase for a fraction of the cost compared to a higher (stock) clocked CPU.



1. You must be doing it wrong. If BSOD happens often, you either tweak your settings manually or lower the OC. Simple as that.
2. Sure, I agree. However, 30-50 additional Watts is not going to save a lot of trees. That's less than the power of one standard light bulb.
3. That's what UEFI BIOS is for, and just about every motherboard comes with a utility that will either automatically overclock for you or let you overclock on the fly in windows.
4. 90% of your usage might be non-CPU intensive, but how many other people can say the same? I know I sure as heck can't. My computer usage is 100% CPU dependent.

Regarding #4, I'd say almost everyone who uses a computer can say the same.

 

[nwo]

Regarding #4, I'd say almost everyone who uses a computer can say the same.

Well I do mining on my CPUs which is why I said 100%. OCing the CPU clock speed yields a pretty linear performance increase. Others can say the same if they do encoding, gaming, etc...

 

[UaVaj]

I actually have more reasons to not OC:

1. More reliable computing experience, less BSOD, etc
2. More green to environment, less power
3. No need to tinker with BIOS, settings, etc.
4. Not much benefit for more than 90% of computer usage which is browsing, youtube, email, etc.

well said.

given the task. only time to seriously consider overclocking is when you already have the best hardware and it is still not fast enough.

otherwise just easier to just buy the next faster hardware.

exception is. 1) you got more time than money. so you tinker to find out how hard a particular hardware can be push before failure. and 2) cause this is anand tech forum.