Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

Just wanted to know wether or not people would rather o/c than buy a more expensive CPU, just to save a few bucks, or just to have the bragging rights.

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

if you have the money just buy a better cpu then over clock it :p

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

Forgive me for sounding like a n00b, but since my expertiese lay in the software area, how do you actualy "Overclock" a CPU? And what are the side effects?

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

well if you over clock it to much you can fry it

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

It'll heat up more than if it was at the stock clock speed. You'd need at least 3 large fans for a one gighertz overclock i believe.

Re: Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

FileTrekker, overclocking a CPU involves raising the either the FSB or CPU multiplier in the bios, therebye reaching a faster speed. Let me explain:

FSB x CPU Multiplier= Speed in mhz

For example:

133 x 10.5 = 1396.5, or roughly 1.4 Ghz. This is the speed of an Athlon XP 1600+

In the case of Intel CPUs, the Multiplier is burned into the processor at the factory, and cannot be changed. However, on AMD CPUs, the multiplier is either unlocked or can be unlocked by doing some wierd stuff to the processor, often called "unlocking". I don't really know how this is done as I have never done it.

Theres also one thing about upping the FSB in the bios. That number controls the system bus speed, which, when changed, will alter the speed that everything runs in the system.

The major side effects of overclocking a CPU are:

1) an increase in speed (duh)

2) an increase in heat

3) Possibly a decrease in system stability

If your system fails to boot, crashes when booting into windows, or crashes on a program with a high CPU load (such as prime95 or 3DMark2001), the overclock is unstable, and you must lower the multipier or the FSB.

More often than not, you'll need to get a new heatsink & fan for your processor before you overclock. You'll also probably need a few new case fans, and maybe even hard drive and chipset fans. To get a higher, you need more cooling, which often involves extreme and strange cooling methods. These include liquid cooling, dry ice, and even refrigeration! I am definetly not the the authority on overclocking, so I may be wrong on some of this, but I'm pretty sure I've got most of this right. Hope that answers your question FileTrekker.

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

I OC a bit, but mostly because I don't want to spend an large amount of money for the next speed grade.

Example: Here, in Canada, a 2500+ Barton costs ~$125-$160 depending on where you go. The next Barton, a 2800+ Barton, costs about $280. The difference in clock speed is about 200 MHz. The 2500+ will easily OC that much and more. Its just not worth the extra money, unless you aren't OC'ing.

Just remeber, when OCing, you stress your componemts more, and shorten their lifetime. Is it worth it? Depends. You have to weigh the prce vs lifetime factor.

Re: Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

I would have to agree. I have an XP 1700+ T-Bred B, possibly the best of the Athlons for o/cing, and I'm getting the speed of a 2500+ Barton out of it. I'm using a Tt Volcano 7+, and together, they both cost less than than the Barton OEM.

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

Should this not belong in the hardware forum?

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

I set an annual date around the middle of January. I set aside some cash and splash out on the best hardware I can afford. Two CPUs have melted under my regime (the second actually melted... there was molten chip on the CPU casing...). I usually find it's more trouble than it's worth. I can't abide crashing, and it's generally more frequent on an O/Ced system, especially when a component design is already reaching the end of its upgradable life by the time you buy it. The only time I overclocked with intent to keep was my current graphics card, Ti4200, which I had running at the GPU and memory speeds of just between a Ti4400 and Ti4600 on its existing cooler with some degree of stability. But then I changed it back. Mainly because every year I sell off any hardware I can, and I feel better knowing I haven't burnt the life out of it.

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

What kind of cooling were you using?

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

On what? The two CPUs? They weren't overclocked, they burnt out for other reasons. First was a store computer, first I ever had, and they hadn't attached the heatsink properly. Second was the one I told you about before. My 2400+, back in Jan. The fan failed, it didn't tell me. I didn't realise till I smelt burning and the screen went blank.

As for my graphics card, when I first overclocked it I had it running on its original alluminium heatsink, no problems, at those speeds I mentioned. But after a while I think the bearings on the fan started making a rattling noise, so I went out and bought a copper Thermaltake cooler, with copper memory heatsinks. Now purely for lifespan reasons I've turned it down to just above normal speeds.

I OC my AMD xp2500+ to make it runs at xp3200+ speed and all with water cooling. :rock:

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

Ok, I see your reasons matt. I have heard that overclocking will take approximately half the life of the component. For CPUs, this isnt really a problem, since the will last 20 years normally, and most people upgrade the comps before there CPU is 10 years old. But still, if your going to sell your used parts, the value is probably higher if it wasn't o/ced.

C'mon people, we need more votes! Only two people have voted since the start!

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

Yeah, there's a lot of people out there who aren't gamers, and don't need to upgrade very often. So they buy second-hand components which run at much higher speeds than they actually need, but are much cheaper than brand new stuff. I was one of them, in fact. Till I got into PC gaming, this household was still running an old 386 PC. They're about as old as me, lol. The PC I've got now, instead of selling off the parts and refilling the case, I'm going to get a hold of some extra parts like monitors, CD ROMs and peripherals and network them together, have a permenant LAN to play around with. By the time I'm finished with these, they'll be worthless, so I might overclock them.

And yeah, sorry about that. Forgot to vote :S

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

Its really fun to overclock old stuff, like pentium 1's and below, because if you get the right cooling, its really easy to do a high o/c because they often leave the multipiers unlocked. Plus, the heatsinks and fans are cheap, as is everything else. Just go down to your local goodwill and you can pick up a couple of old systems cheap, and then you can just lay the components on the floor on anti-static bags and experiment.

Re: Overclocking VS. Better CPU
 

I was thinking of starting out on old stuff. We've got a lot of old components strewn across the house from my dad's computer-building business ventures. I might look into it.