Why should I overclock?

[Margo1]

I know overclocking gives better gaming performance. What other reasons, if any, should it be tried?

 

[MustISO]

Other than improving performance I can't think of any reason.

 

[Chappie]

It's cool!!! right???

 

[dma0991]

Bragging rights. :biggrin:

 

[Puppies04]

I know overclocking gives better gaming performance. What other reasons, if any, should it be tried?

Nobody is forcing you! BTW saying overclocking gives better gaming performance is a very general statement and not always true.

 

[dbcooper1]

If you have to ask, you probably shouldn't.

 

[Arkadrel]

I know overclocking gives better gaming performance. What other reasons, if any, should it be tried?

The question is why not?

Free performance?

or buy cheaper hardware, overclock it and pocket $, and still have sameish performance as people that spend more do.

 

[Jacky60]

You shouldn't

 

[Puppies04]

You shouldn't

Is that a stock 920 @ 4.2ghz in your sig jacky or don't you like taking your own advice

 

[Borealis7]

because you can! be thankful, some people these days can't O/C! (non-K SNBs)

 

[Arachnotronic]

"Overclocking is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." -- Richard Feynman

 

[RyanGreener]

I know overclocking gives better gaming performance. What other reasons, if any, should it be tried?

There are no other reasons....

 

[GrumpyMan]

If you have to ask, don't do it, no need.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Nobody is forcing you! BTW saying overclocking gives better gaming performance is a very general statement and not always true.

When is it not true?

 

[RyanGreener]

When is it not true?

Although I didn't get quoted, the one time it might not be true is when it does not increase performance due to the fact that you are not bottlenecked in that regard. IE: Overclocking a 2600k to 5 GHz for a game that's 10 years old and a Pentium 4 can run.

Or, he meant that an unstable/bad overclock could cause problems and not increase performance in that regard.

 

[jhu]

When is it not true?

When the video card is subpar.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

 

[E6700]

u dont have to.

 

[Puppies04]

When is it not true?

Yep pretty much what has already been said, If you are GPU bottlenecked or your minimum FPS > refresh rate of your monitor then overclocking your cpu has no impact on gameplay.

 

[wirednuts]

depends on your setup. my i3 cpu is good at stock, but great at 3.5ghz.

and thanks... after thinking about ocing, i googled up how to o/c my asus 1005hab netbook.

i went from cpu at 1.6 to 1.93, and video gpu was increased 2.5x faster. its mucho quicker now!

 

[DaveSimmons]

I don't. Usually by the time a game or application needs more than stock speed it's time to buy a new CPU anyway.

I'd only do it if I needed the extra performance and wasn't ready for a system upgrade yet (or no faster CPU was available).

But I'm lazy and prefer not to worry about the difference between the system being 100% stable and only 99%.

 

[Smartazz]

Free performance, however it can come at the cost of extra power consumption and potentially instability. I think the added power consumption is worth it as long as you don't go overboard with overvolting. I've also never had problems with my CPU overclocks, but I keep them on the low side. If I'm not mistaken, increasing CPU clock speed increases power consumption linearly, whereas changing the voltage will have an exponential effect on power consumption. Meaning that if you stay near stock volts, power consumption won't change much.

 

[fourdegrees11]

If you can get it to run stable why not? You increase the value of your purchase for free. I'm getting 800mhz over a $190 x6, and I only paid $160! As long as I get a couple years out of it til I'm ready to upgrade I'm not concerned with life span issues.

 

[Gillbot]

You shouldn't

this

 

[deimos3428]

If you're going for performance per watt, you should undervolt. I think.