Should Overclocking Be Automatic?

[VaporX]

I think El_Capitan hit on the point I am stressing. Right now I do not think I have seen a chip that using stock cooling and voltage I could not get at least 10% out of. Since this is essentially a free 10% I am wondering if every DIYer should not just assume this will be done and do it each time they build.

[Disparaitre]

Man, I wish every CPU did 10% @ stock volts with stock cooling. Then the 6000+'s I owned in the past would have all done 3.3ghz Guess you haven't seen many CPU's or haven't been OverClocking long if you also didn't notice that AXP 3200+'s rarely ever did 2.4ghz without massive tweaking. Also, the latest CPU that wouldn't OC for crap for me was a G0 Q6600 a friend had that after swapping my B3 Q600 for his for testing I realzed that he got screwed, his CPU didn't post past 2.5ghz without extra voltage and despite staying below 60*C on a P5Q Pro Turbo wouldn't get past 2.7ghz no matter what. I got my CPU to 3.5ghz on his board so I know it wasn't the board. I'll admit, I was amazed that his CPU was so much crap that it couldn't even be bsel mod'd to 3ghz like every other Q6600 I have ever had my hands on.

 

CPU's have gotten better for Overclocking overall, yes. But I say no, no, a thousand times no. Voting no.

 

If every CPU did do 10% over stock without any tweaking then the cherry 6000+ 89w CPU my friends father has in his rig wouldn't be special at all for being able to do 3.5ghz on stock voltage.

 

Not all CPU's can do 10% over stock with default voltage. Not all CPU's can do 10% over stock without extreme cooling. Not all people wnt to run the risk of increasing the power draw of the CPU enough to make the mobo go pop because that is waaaaaay more likely than the CPU going out and happenes all the time.

 

Overclocking at all has risks or I would recommend that everyone do it, instead. I recommend only people willing to take the time to join a forum, maintain their PC properly and have basic technical skill, OverClock. Above all, I make sure anyone wanting to OverClock to understand that they are indeed going to shorten the lifespan and increase the heat output of their parts. There is no "IF" to either of those, it's a fact. Fact is you will shorten the lifespan and create more heat OverClocking. Facct is also you are not guaranteed, EVER that anything you have will OverClock no matter who you are, how much yo know or what you use.

Edited May 16, 2011 by WARDOZERX

[El_Capitan]

I do admit, it all depends on the DIY'er. There's:

1. The Builders - people who just put the parts together and turn it on

2. The Modders - people who customize their builds

3. The Overclockers - those that know how to overclock

 

A DIY'er might only know how to do one thing above, but I think what ComputerEd might be saying would be the typical DYI'er is #1 and #3.

 

As for WARDOZERX, I never got into older systems except way back in 1998 to 2003. I didn't pick back up with building and overclocking systems until 2008. For the latest CPU's, they do easily get up to a 10% - 15% overclock, if you select the right motherboard and/or memory and CPU for overclocking. For example, you won't get a good stock voltage overclock with an i5 2500k or i7 2600k on a MSI P67 motherboard compared to an ASUS, ASRock, or Gigabyte board. The MSI P67 motherboards just don't handle voltages very well. If you have a 1055T and a cheap OCZ 1333MHz memory kit, you won't get that great of an overclock, either.

 

At any rate, if the DYI'er is a builder and an overclocker, there shouldn't be any reason not to even ATTEMPT to see if the CPU can overclock with stock voltages.

[Disparaitre]

At best, you can say that it is highly likely that most all modern CPU's can do 10% over stock with no additional voltage or cooling but thats the absolute you can say reguardless of experience or combination of parts used. Manufacturers cannot even guarantee a quad will be a quad, this is why AMD has x3 and x2 CPU's where there should have been quads, this is why there are CPU's with disabled cache. This is why we have CPU's using a wide array of stock voltages. There are no guarantees on this and there never will be.

 

No one should ever expect anything more than what they pay for. If you want a 3.3ghz CPU buy a 3.3ghz CPU, don't buy a 3ghz CPU and get pissed when you can't get 3.3ghz or when your mobo's mosfets start popping like corn kernals ready to be buttered.

 

No, no DIYer should ever expect any OC and they should never ever relay that expectation onto anyone. As OverClockers we understand the rules and risks and we should be responsible in not trying to force the risks on anyone without them properly understanding those risks.

 

Are you going to take personal responsibility for all of the newbies to OverClocking tha read your poll and think "Hey, I'm guaranteed a 10% OverClock, here we go *tica taca tap, tickity tap tap* *enter* BZZZZZFT* *POW* "Hey, what the hell happened? It was only a 10% OverClock? WTF?!"

 

Now, if you were asking if every OverClocker should try to get 10% out of every system they build, for themselves. I say hell yes. Every DIY with a decade of professional experiance understanding the settings in the bios but not all of the risks of OverClocking? No, they aren't an OverClocker.

 

The poll should read "Should all OverClocking be Automatic for OverClockers?" Of course then it'd be redundant.

 

Please don't encourage the masses to do stupid stuff or think they are entitled to anything because, well. They're stupid.

 

My final closing arguement on this. As an OverClocker I hope for at least 10% OC's on everything I own, I am dissapointed when I don't get it and will resell parts if I really want that extra speed. I do not OverClock every system I built ( mainly the ones with no software or bios support for OverClocking : ) and I fully understand and have seen that nothing is guranteed outside of death. Life isn't even guaranteed, just death and unless you can actually prove otherwise ( cannot be done ) then I'ma have to say that 10% OverClocks are nice but should not be expected by anyone, ever. It's that expectation and state of mind that make people return perfectly good CPU's because they are too fn cheap and stupid to buy the right one thinking they are owed "free speed".

 

WD, out.

Edited May 16, 2011 by WARDOZERX

[VaporX]

You will notice the now on my statement above, I was inferring modern CPUs. As for how long, well my first overclock experience was a Celeron 300, the first uber overclockable chip.

 

My point is that in the case of the DIYer we have people that have a natural inclination to tweak plus usually a person that wants better performance. With this in mind and the EASE with which a 10% overclock can be achieved. my question is based on is there a reason really not to get that 10% clock boost?

 

I am asking this here due to the nature of this sites followers and wanting to ghet a feel for the typical overclockers response. My own opinion might be very different than this discussion leads people to believe.

[hierovision]

The answer is still no. The parts should operate at the manufacturers default frequency and voltage unless requested otherwise by the customer. The only way I can see it being OK to squeak out 10-15% as a standard is if you make that known clearly beforehand

 

This isn't about the capabilities of current chips, it's about the customer receiving something outside of the specifications they ordered. You just don't do that.

[Boinker]

Depends on he user. if they are going to monitor there system and keep good tabs on it like cleaning it out once in a while the its ok to do that. The issue would be liabilty in my mind and for someone who has an overclocked system and not know a thing of what there doing is a ticking time bomb IMHO. I think no.

 

 

[VaporX]

The answer is still no. The parts should operate at the manufacturers default frequency and voltage unless requested otherwise by the customer. The only way I can see it being OK to squeak out 10-15% as a standard is if you make that known clearly beforehand

 

This isn't about the capabilities of current chips, it's about the customer receiving something outside of the specifications they ordered. You just don't do that.

 

HOLD ON!!! No one is saying do this for a customer, I am asking about DO IT Yourself people, ie someone that is building their own PC.

[Locutus]

Man, I wish every CPU did 10% @ stock volts with stock cooling. Then the 6000+'s I owned in the past would have all done 3.3ghz Guess you haven't seen many CPU's or haven't been OverClocking long if you also didn't notice that AXP 3200+'s rarely ever did 2.4ghz without massive tweaking. Also, the latest CPU that wouldn't OC for crap for me was a G0 Q6600 a friend had that after swapping my B3 Q600 for his for testing I realzed that he got screwed, his CPU didn't post past 2.5ghz without extra voltage and despite staying below 60*C on a P5Q Pro Turbo wouldn't get past 2.7ghz no matter what. I got my CPU to 3.5ghz on his board so I know it wasn't the board. I'll admit, I was amazed that his CPU was so much crap that it couldn't even be bsel mod'd to 3ghz like every other Q6600 I have ever had my hands on.

 

CPU's have gotten better for Overclocking overall, yes. But I say no, no, a thousand times no. Voting no.

 

If every CPU did do 10% over stock without any tweaking then the cherry 6000+ 89w CPU my friends father has in his rig wouldn't be special at all for being able to do 3.5ghz on stock voltage.

 

Not all CPU's can do 10% over stock with default voltage. Not all CPU's can do 10% over stock without extreme cooling. Not all people wnt to run the risk of increasing the power draw of the CPU enough to make the mobo go pop because that is waaaaaay more likely than the CPU going out and happenes all the time.

 

Overclocking at all has risks or I would recommend that everyone do it, instead. I recommend only people willing to take the time to join a forum, maintain their PC properly and have basic technical skill, OverClock. Above all, I make sure anyone wanting to OverClock to understand that they are indeed going to shorten the lifespan and increase the heat output of their parts. There is no "IF" to either of those, it's a fact. Fact is you will shorten the lifespan and create more heat OverClocking. Facct is also you are not guaranteed, EVER that anything you have will OverClock no matter who you are, how much yo know or what you use.

I don't think he's talking about ancient hardware here.

 

Oh, and the oldest CPU I have sitting around is an old 2GHz single core AM2 chip and it easily hits 2.2GHz but it's limited by the FSB on the crap mobo I have it in. XD

[BluePanda]

It completely depends on the hardware and the application. I don't think I've run a single thing I've owned in the last 15 years at the stock settings.

 

Builds for my family? Stock all the way, if not undervolted and underclocked to keep builds from blowing up when they inevitably forget to clean them out once a year.

 

This is Waco btw.

[IVIYTH0S]

I don't like how Intel's turbo boost only boosts the speed on one core. AMD has the real turbo boost, auto overclocking is cool. I'll still push passed that but I'm not against auto for normal peeps

 

It completely depends on the hardware and the application. I don't think I've run a single thing I've owned in the last 15 years at the stock settings.

 

Builds for my family? Stock all the way, if not undervolted and underclocked to keep builds from blowing up when they inevitably forget to clean them out once a year.

 

This is Waco btw.

Undervolted my dad's 940 X4 a couple months ago!! Laptops are undervolted too! (didn't help mine get any extra battery life because of my blasted discrete graphics card and the CPU is already a fairly low power one)

[hierovision]

HOLD ON!!! No one is saying do this for a customer, I am asking about DO IT Yourself people, ie someone that is building their own PC.

 

I thought for sure you meant for customers. I changed my vote lol.

 

With the latest three generations of Intel chips it's a no-brainer IMO. 1155, 1156, and 1366... even a lot of 775 have nearly-free performance waiting to be tapped. I haven't used AMD since my trusty 4200+ so I can't comment on them from personal experience, but from what I've read they offer plenty of extra performance as well.