Why overclock?

[Charlie98]

No, this isn't a troll post. D: And I don't want this to dissolve into a pissing contest over OC'ing and chipsets.

I'm new to computer building, just finished my first build with a i5 2500K CPU and, with the GB mobo, overclocking it is as easy as a click of a mouse. But why? What, specifically, does OC'ing do? Is it to just get more performance out of a given CPU, kind of like 'chipping' a vehicle motor? Or are there other benefits to OC'ing? And why not just get a bigger/better/faster CPU to start with, avoiding system instability altogether?

I'm currently running my i5 stock right now, I don't have a GPU (yet) so everything is fine, but... someday... :whiste:

 

[Arachnotronic]

Getting a bigger, faster CPU requires spending more money, so OC'ing is free performance. If you have the biggest, baddest CPU, you don't have anywhere else to go but to overclock.

It's also fun.

 

[Charlie98]

It's also fun.

'Fun' to me is a stable system that will last 5 years without the BSOD or system lockups...

Compared to my old desktop (a Pentium D Dell) my new system is a superhero...

 

[dma0991]

My question is, why not? You've bought a CPU that has overclocking potential so why not overclock it since you bought it in the first place. If overclocking is not your thing why do you buy a Core i5 2500K instead of a Core i5 2500?

 

[SlowSpyder]

'Fun' to me is a stable system that will last 5 years without the BSOD or system lockups...

Compared to my old desktop (a Pentium D Dell) my new system is a superhero...

Overclocking doesn't automatically mean instability.

As an example, my chip runs it's six cores at 3.2GHz. I was able to push it to 4.03GHz and increase the NB/L3 speed by 600MHz (2.6GHz vs. 2.0GHz stock). So in theory I should expect a solid 25%+ performance.

In my case my CPU is likely the slowest part of my system when I game, it is likely holding my 5870's back from as high of frame rates as I could get. So the extra CPU power should give me a noticeable performance boost in games I play. I have no issues with stability whatsoever. Other than power draw being higher than I'd like I have nothing but good coming from having my CPU overclocked.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

'Fun' to me is a stable system that will last 5 years without the BSOD or system lockups...

Compared to my old desktop (a Pentium D Dell) my new system is a superhero...

You can have that with an overclocked system as well. My 2600k is running 4.3ghz with barely more voltage than stock. I have a megahalems cpu cooler on it and it will never see higher temps than 65c and thats using a stress test. I'd bet you with a stock cooler subject your CPU to much higher temps than my overclocked chip will ever see.

 

[Charlie98]

My question is, why not? You've bought a CPU that has overclocking potential so why not overclock it since you bought it in the first place. If overclocking is not your thing why do you buy a Core i5 2500K instead of a Core i5 2500?

Good question... for the same reason I bought a V-10 in my pickup. I don't drive around with my foot on the floor, but the power is there if I need it. I bought the 2500K for the versatility.

I guess maybe a better question question is 'why do YOU' overclock? Does it make sense because of graphics or other video rendering? Better performance from programs and software? Or is OC'ing just a means to an end in and of itself?

Part of my question is reliability... I'm reading threads of system instability and BSOD and whatnot.

 

[IGemini]

I'm new to computer building, just finished my first build with a i5 2500K CPU and, with the GB mobo, overclocking it is as easy as a click of a mouse. But why? What, specifically, does OC'ing do? Is it to just get more performance out of a given CPU, kind of like 'chipping' a vehicle motor? Or are there other benefits to OC'ing? And why not just get a bigger/better/faster CPU to start with, avoiding system instability altogether?

Ever since Intel released the Core architecture, overclocking has gotten way more stable. Gone are the days where one could only muster a 200MHz squeeze on a 2-3GHz core and maybe be unstable. Now 33% overclocks are the norm, and it grants more staying power even compared to newer hardware. My CPU is actually volted lower than its VID (1.225v) and is really stable. It won't equal a 2500K, but it's still a relevant CPU in overall processing power.

Overclocking started as buying budget CPUs like Coppermine Celerons and OCing them to rival high-end PIIIs. Now they shifted that to performance CPUs and maxing those out.

 

[Charlie98]

In my case my CPU is likely the slowest part of my system when I game, it is likely holding my 5870's back from as high of frame rates as I could get. So the extra CPU power should give me a noticeable performance boost in games I play. I have no issues with stability whatsoever. Other than power draw being higher than I'd like I have nothing but good coming from having my CPU overclocked.

You can have that with an overclocked system as well. My 2600k is running 4.3ghz with barely more voltage than stock. I have a megahalems cpu cooler on it and it will never see higher temps than 65c and thats using a stress test. I'd bet you with a stock cooler subject your CPU to much higher temps than my overclocked chip will ever see.

That all makes sense...

The highest temps I've seen so far is 41C with my 212+...

 

[Charlie98]

Overclocking started as buying budget CPUs like Coppermine Celerons and OCing them to rival high-end PIIIs. Now they shifted that to performance CPUs and maxing those out.

...that's interesting, I didn't know that.

 

[IGemini]

Yup...I just looked again and I was ahead by one Pentium family, but the principle is the same.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I'm gonna be honest. I run the chip in my sig @ 4142MHz not because I need more performance, but because I like getting the very best out of my hardware.

As for stability, yeah, you can get a rock solid OC if you try. I've been running Prime95 Small FFT for 4 days straight and I've not had any problems.

 

[Kenmitch]

Buying a K series chip doesn't mean you have to overclock it. It just means that you have the option for higher clocks later. Even the non K chips can be somewhat overclcoked as long as they have turbo. The important thing is you left yourself the option of overclocking later if you feel the need.

The basic principle is getting more than you paid for when overclocking. The K series of chips are somewhat of a strange marketing ploy from intel. In the past you'd have to pay for the xtra mhz which carried a hefty premium sometimes for just another 100-200mhz. Now intel pretty much is giving away free mhz with purchase of the K chips.

 

[Markfw]

Overclocking started as buying budget CPUs like Coppermine Celerons and OCing them to rival high-end PIIIs. Now they shifted that to performance CPUs and maxing those out.

Ah, no. My first overclock as a 4.77 8088 to 7.2 mhz, then a 6 mhz 80286 to 9.13 mhz, and then a AMD K6-2 166 to 200, etc..

I forget all the systems I have overclocked. And someone here probably has be beat with an even older system they overclocked.

 

[Kristijonas]

Personally I don't see a need for any casual PC user to overclock their i5 or 17 processors. I mean, it's not that it will chance anything noticably. These processors are already damn fast on stock clocks. I think it's as Intel17 said, a psichological thing when people want the best out of their hardware, however I personally feel best when, like Charlie98, I know I have a monster car/PC, and I know that I can use it at 50% of it's power and be content with it. Overclocking feels to me like a bums stretching out. I mean, if I had a billion $, I wouldn't be wasting my time earning more (unless I had a goal to conquer space or something like that). So yeah, I think unless you're doing serious video editing/rendering or if your CPU is years old - there's no real need for overclocking. Oh, and actually I have a habit of downclocking my CPU from 3.3ghz to 1.6ghz when I go to sleep (with music and downloads on) or when I'm just internet browsing. It feels nice when you know your CPU is good for everything in 1.6ghz and 3.3hz just the same.

 

[IGemini]

It was an example, Mark. I know it predates Celeron. The point was that overclocking enthusiasm shifted from budget to high-end over time.

 

[Ken g6]

See my sig for why I overclock. PrimeGrid is like running the Prime95 small FFT test all the time, so it really has to be rock solid.

Well, technically, that's why I want to overclock. I did for awhile, but scratched my old mobo and I was too cheap to buy a good replacement. (That and nobody told me G41 boards don't go past 333FSB.)

 

[TheUnk]

Basically because I wouldn't buy a ferrari and never hit the gas.

 

[notty22]

See this thread, asked a couple weeks ago in this forum section, for more answers.:CPUs and Overclocking

Why should I overclock?

 

[fourdegrees11]

Why not get free performance? Even a simple bump of a couple hundred mhz gives you the performance of a chip that could cost $50+ more.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

'Fun' to me is a stable system that will last 5 years without the BSOD or system lockups...

 

[Greg04]

'Fun' to me is a stable system that will last 5 years without the BSOD or system lockups...

Compared to my old desktop (a Pentium D Dell) my new system is a superhero...

Running an E2200 (2.2ghz factory) @ 3.2ghz for 4.5 years solid with zero BSODs. I think I have the last of the functional ABIT IP35e's out there . That's fun. And I paid about $75 for the chip back in what seems like 1948. But...the damned thing is still pretty quick with a vertex 2 SSD, so I haven't upgraded yet. Next in line will likely be a 2600k/Asus combo. I used to upgrade every years, but haven't felt the itch.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Personally I don't see a need for any casual PC user to overclock their i5 or 17 processors. I mean, it's not that it will chance anything noticably. These processors are already damn fast on stock clocks. I think it's as Intel17 said, a psichological thing when people want the best out of their hardware, however I personally feel best when, like Charlie98, I know I have a monster car/PC, and I know that I can use it at 50% of it's power and be content with it. Overclocking feels to me like a bums stretching out. I mean, if I had a billion $, I wouldn't be wasting my time earning more (unless I had a goal to conquer space or something like that). So yeah, I think unless you're doing serious video editing/rendering or if your CPU is years old - there's no real need for overclocking. Oh, and actually I have a habit of downclocking my CPU from 3.3ghz to 1.6ghz when I go to sleep (with music and downloads on) or when I'm just internet browsing. It feels nice when you know your CPU is good for everything in 1.6ghz and 3.3hz just the same.

Ever hear of clock gating?

 

[Idontcare]

Part of my question is reliability... I'm reading threads of system instability and BSOD and whatnot.

Not many people go to the time and effort to create threads bragging that their OC was as super-dope easy as it turned out to be. For those folks they OC, smile, and move on with doing more fun stuff with their lives.

The threads you see regarding stability issues are the vocal minority who can't move on to doing more fun stuff with their time until they get the OC straightened out, so they have time to expend on the matter, hence the threads.

OC'ing is easy to do, which means it is easy to get yourself up a creek without a paddle.

The most critical thing to a new OC'ers effort is to find someone who has your exact same mobo and then learn from them as no two mobo's bios options are labeled the same. Eliminate the communications barrier and walk in someone elses shoes down a path they already marked out with their own trial and error.

Once you get some experience under your belt then it really isn't such an issue when you lock up your system and need to reset the CMOS and so on.

But yeah, you are forever going to be seeing threads from new OC'ers who get in over their heads real quick with these easy-to-overclock mobos but they aren't all that familiar themselves with the difference from a CMOS battery and a VGA port.

 

[BD231]

No, this isn't a troll post. D: And I don't want this to dissolve into a pissing contest over OC'ing and chipsets.

I'm new to computer building, just finished my first build with a i5 2500K CPU and, with the GB mobo, overclocking it is as easy as a click of a mouse. But why? What, specifically, does OC'ing do? Is it to just get more performance out of a given CPU, kind of like 'chipping' a vehicle motor? Or are there other benefits to OC'ing? And why not just get a bigger/better/faster CPU to start with, avoiding system instability altogether?

I'm currently running my i5 stock right now, I don't have a GPU (yet) so everything is fine, but... someday... :whiste:

Yes just like a motor, and personally I'm cruisin the information highway on 120mm spinners top down burnin up all kinna volts switchin screens screamin out ghz aint a thing. Join me?