Author Topic: overclocking (Read 9411 times)

mrchester · « **on:** February 01, 2008, 08:49:24 AM »

what a great site this is, im really learning a lot just by reading these questions and answers, but i see this mentioned frequently, what is over clocking, can this be adjusted higher or lower, what does it do, thanks for any help,

neljan · « **Reply #1 on:** February 01, 2008, 08:59:24 AM »

Found this:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2188777,00.asp

Deerpark · « **Reply #2 on:** February 01, 2008, 09:11:37 AM »

Overclocking is to increase the clock speed of a component beyond what the manufacturer intended, in order to increase the performance of the component. You usually overclock the CPU, graphics card and/or RAM.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overclocking

neljan · « **Reply #3 on:** February 01, 2008, 09:12:30 AM »

Are you an overclocker DeerPark?

Deerpark · « **Reply #4 on:** February 01, 2008, 09:23:22 AM »

I have been in the past... back when I was trying to squeeze every last FPS out of my machine.
But at some point I simply stopped caring whether a game runs at 90 or a 100 FPS...
And when you factor in the disadvantages of overclocking I just didn't find it worthwhile anymore.

patio · « **Reply #5 on:** February 01, 2008, 09:46:53 AM »

It's the best and shortest method to be in the market for a new rig sometimes...

neljan · « **Reply #6 on:** February 01, 2008, 11:09:50 AM »

I have no need to

Spoiler · « **Reply #7 on:** February 01, 2008, 11:12:46 AM »

I agree....in the old days you got a lot more out things by overclocking. Now the hardware is so fast overclocking really isn't worth the time or effort.

Calum · « **Reply #8 on:** February 01, 2008, 11:32:03 AM »

My own opinion is that overclocking, when done properly, can save a ton of cash and/or significantly increase your performance.
Think: I am planning my new build. I can choose a £40 CPU or a £120 CPU. The £40 CPU can be overclocked to beat the £120 CPU, with no extra cooling requirements. Yes, the £120 CPU can also be overclocked, but this way I save £80 and have the same performance.
It's not a cure-all solution, and it's certainly not for the inexperienced. However, I disagree that modern hardware realises less benefits from overclocking, IMHO it's at least the same, if not more. Are there any old CPUs that can manage over a 100% overclock? I don't know of any, but several modern CPUs are capable of this.
Also, remember that the opposite, underclocking, can be great to extend battery life and/or reduce heat.

WillyW · « **Reply #9 on:** February 01, 2008, 11:36:32 AM »

Quote from: mrchester on February 01, 2008, 08:49:24 AM

what a great site this is,

It sure is.

Quote

im really learning a lot just by reading these questions and answers,

I do too.
But - don't forget that there is much more to CH than just these forums.
Lots of informative articles, etc.

Check out:
http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/o/overcloc.htm

Quote

but i see this mentioned frequently, what is over clocking, can this be adjusted higher or lower, what does it do, thanks for any help,

Spoiler · « **Reply #10 on:** February 01, 2008, 12:09:16 PM »

I did not mean to sound like overclocking can't get more out of cheaper hardware. It still has a place but in most cases today's hardware has come down in price and the speed has incresed so much that the need for overclocking has been greatly reduced.

neljan · « **Reply #11 on:** February 01, 2008, 01:02:38 PM »

I think that if you're overclocking, you're inviting the possibilty of problems & you have to ask yourself whether the risk is really worth it. Even a possibility of something going wrong for me is a no no.

Yes, it can be harmless, but is it worth the risk? overclocking could work fine for a long time (for some) fine all the time (for others) but go sadly wrong (for most).

So, you have to ask yourself one question, do you feel lucky?

Well..... do yu? PUNK?

Calum · « **Reply #12 on:** February 02, 2008, 05:34:49 AM »

That's why I would recommend that only advanced users delve into overclocking, and only after reading up as much as possible before starting.
It can cause a lot of problems, but there are two sides to every story.

neljan · « **Reply #13 on:** February 02, 2008, 08:25:55 AM »

And only people with cheap/slow components...

Calum · « **Reply #14 on:** February 03, 2008, 02:37:06 AM »

Again, I hate to disagree, but I am pretty sure you could see more benefit from overclocking, say, an Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 than, say, an Intel Pentium 3. The former can realise much higher clock speeds than the latter, and also a larger increase from stock speeds, therefore I would say that overclocking the newer, more expensive CPU has in this case led to a larger increase in performance.

patio · « **Reply #15 on:** February 03, 2008, 07:31:09 AM »

One of my client's called me last month right after the Holiday...his 15 year old son burned up the Q6600 i had bult for his Architect Home Office...needless to say he was pretty peeved.
I had read that the Q6600 handles OC'ing pretty well...

neljan · « **Reply #16 on:** February 03, 2008, 02:35:34 PM »

Quote from: Calum on February 03, 2008, 02:37:06 AM

Again, I hate to disagree, but I am pretty sure you could see more benefit from overclocking, say, an Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 than, say, an Intel Pentium 3. The former can realise much higher clock speeds than the latter, and also a larger increase from stock speeds, therefore I would say that overclocking the newer, more expensive CPU has in this case led to a larger increase in performance.

I have to admit to being a complete noob at that sort of stuff & it seems you know what your talking about.

Just not for me, but if I was gonna, I'll come talk to you

LtRyan5184 · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2008, 06:48:20 PM »

I had a client Burn up and Intel Celeron Socket 370...... it was 266MHz, and the guy was new to computers, wanted it to run XP fast, so he screwed wiht his jumper settings.....

meh. ive never seen a PC that wrecked...... overclocking is quite good when used properly however can cause damage when not properly done

fpsmitch · « **Reply #18 on:** February 05, 2008, 09:36:23 AM »

i agree, overclocking is great, i have an older machine(amd athlon 3500+2.2)
now overclocked to a nice 2.6 stable...no need for new cooling components either...
if you do it right you can save money but if you mess up you can cost your whole build...

neljan · « **Reply #19 on:** February 05, 2008, 09:43:51 AM »

As you said ' I have an older machine'

Would you o/c with a new build that's already quick enough?

fpsmitch · « **Reply #20 on:** February 05, 2008, 09:53:41 AM »

if it meets the needs no...
but it is always an option, specially when i play computer games and i get LAG!
that is one of my biggest pet peeves, haha but if i was to build a new machine heck no i wouldnt, like you guys said there is always the risk. and i would not risk a brand new computer that was fast enough allready to handle what i want to do...

neljan · « **Reply #21 on:** February 05, 2008, 09:56:51 AM »

Hey, I just did that speed test thing:

That's crap right? how can I speed that up?

fpsmitch · « **Reply #22 on:** February 05, 2008, 10:29:12 AM »

lol, get a better isp

neljan · « **Reply #23 on:** February 05, 2008, 10:30:34 AM »

lol I knew you were gonna say that!

Who are you with?

Calum · « **Reply #24 on:** February 05, 2008, 10:41:24 AM »

Quote from: patio on February 03, 2008, 07:31:09 AM

I had read that the Q6600 handles OC'ing pretty well...

It does.
That's down to inexperience and/or impatience.

Quote from: neljan on February 03, 2008, 02:35:34 PM

I have to admit to being a complete noob at that sort of stuff & it seems you know what your talking about.

Just not for me, but if I was gonna, I'll come talk to you

I'm flattered, lol. I'm no expert on the topic, I know enough to get myself and friends by though.

Personally if the machine was fast enough for my needs there is no point in making it faster, it's a waste of time and/or money.
I upgrade or overclock only when necessary, or desirable.

fpsmitch · « **Reply #25 on:** February 05, 2008, 10:52:37 AM »

lol, i have cox communications, it costs me 96 bucks a month for it and i dont even get a good upload...

neljan · « **Reply #26 on:** February 05, 2008, 10:58:32 AM »

(sorry to be going off topic everyone)

One more question fpsmitch:

The download speed (you know that really BIG number you like showing off

) that's the speed for downloading files & not browsing right? how can I test my browsing speed?

fpsmitch · « **Reply #27 on:** February 07, 2008, 08:14:59 AM »

well, yes that is my download speed, test browsing by going here
http://network.msu.edu/public/speedtest.html

Eg0Death · « **Reply #28 on:** February 07, 2008, 10:34:03 AM »

How's this look?

neljan · « **Reply #29 on:** February 07, 2008, 12:47:44 PM »

To be honest, I couldn't care about upload/download speeds, it's browsing speed that I care about.

Mine is showing as 1.12 meg, man, that's pants!

I'll have to get onto my ISP...

Eg0Death · « **Reply #30 on:** February 07, 2008, 01:05:39 PM »

Well, browsing consists of uploading/downloading, does it not?

Calum · « **Reply #31 on:** February 07, 2008, 01:09:47 PM »

1.2Mb/sec is fine for web browsing.
Most pages are a few Kb, max.
Anything over 256k or so and there will be no difference in normal web browsing speeds.
However, Flash animations, large pictures, videos etc will load faster with faster connections.
And yes, your browsing speed is dependent on your download speed.

neljan · « **Reply #32 on:** February 07, 2008, 03:18:45 PM »

That's where I've always been a bit confused, I guess it's because the word 'downloading' could mean the actual transfering of a file to your HD or the loading of content in a browser.

But why would uploading be a part of browsing? cookies?

Spoiler · « **Reply #33 on:** February 08, 2008, 08:31:35 AM »

Cookies.....and page requests.

Eg0Death · « **Reply #34 on:** February 08, 2008, 01:03:08 PM »

If your upstream data (upload/page request) has a 900 ms ping time, you won't really be browsing. More like staring.

neljan · « **Reply #35 on:** February 08, 2008, 02:03:34 PM »

How do I find out my ping time?

homer · « **Reply #36 on:** February 08, 2008, 04:28:41 PM »

Quote from: neljan on February 08, 2008, 02:03:34 PM

How do I find out my ping time?

Start > Run > type in "cmd" without the qoutes > in the command prompt type in "ping www.computerhope.com"

it will send 4 packets then it will give you a summary at the end. you can do this for any website address or any IP. my ping for computerhope is ~98ms.

neljan · « **Reply #37 on:** February 08, 2008, 05:09:56 PM »

Thanks, mine's 202.

What's that like?

fpsmitch · « **Reply #38 on:** February 08, 2008, 08:29:46 PM »

haha, mine is 39

neljan · « **Reply #39 on:** February 08, 2008, 08:30:55 PM »

Haha but I've got a big ......!

Soviet_Genius · « **Reply #40 on:** February 08, 2008, 08:41:58 PM »

Bigger number is worse. It means that it takes longer for the packet to get to the server. Mine is 55ish. And for some reason for the first three packets said "request timed out". Meh.

neljan · « **Reply #41 on:** February 08, 2008, 08:43:36 PM »

Whooooooosssshhhh!

Over the head another one of my fantastic joke's...

fpsmitch · « **Reply #42 on:** February 08, 2008, 09:02:51 PM »

haha, i got it...

neljan · « **Reply #43 on:** February 08, 2008, 09:05:45 PM »

I'd rather have a big one!

If you've got a small 'ping' try this link.

Computer Hope Forum

News:

Author Topic: overclocking (Read 9411 times)

mrchester

neljan

Deerpark

neljan

Deerpark

patio

neljan

Spoiler

Calum

WillyW

Spoiler

neljan

Calum

neljan

Calum

patio

neljan

LtRyan5184

fpsmitch

neljan

fpsmitch

neljan

fpsmitch

neljan

Calum

fpsmitch

neljan

fpsmitch

Eg0Death

neljan

Eg0Death

Calum

neljan

Spoiler

Eg0Death

neljan

homer

neljan

fpsmitch

neljan

Soviet_Genius

neljan

fpsmitch

neljan