Overclocking - risk and considerations - is it worth it?
Overclocking - risk and considerations - is it worth it?
It is my first time who want to overclock after reading some reviews that one can mildly overclock to get 60-100% gains. It looks impressive.
I am a mild overclocker only. I want to buy some cheap CPUs and overclock them (so they perform like a high-end CPU with less price).
My overclocking principles
I will overclock as much as possible provided that the following conditions are met:
- without shortening my component's life (a very small diminish is acceptable)
- don't spend any/much on cooling device (unless the gains surpass the costs)
1. How risky mild overclocking is?
Originally I think mild overclocking is very low risk. That's why I want to try. But I read someone wrote this in its overclocking guide on the net. This scares me a bit.
Never truly stable? What does it mean?
Does it mean I will still get some crashes or BSOD (although seldom) even though I overclock mildly. If so, it is not acceptable to me. I want to make sure my computer is very stable even after overclocking.
Never overclock if I store important data on a PC? Why?
Does it mean my overclocked PC, even if mildly, will still corrupt my data (although seldom)?
My PC is going to be all-purpose, from working to gaming. Of course hard disk will store personal data and collections. They are not vital but you don't want to lose them anyway. I believe many general users has one PC for all purposes. They will of course have some files or personal data that they value much. This suggestion seems to tell all general users to avoid overclocking.
Please comment and share your experiences.
My overclocking is moderate, not something going to the extreme.
2. Selection on cooling device
For a moderate overclocker like me, what cooling device would you advise me to get?
Should I use the stock fans supplied by the vendor?
Should I buy raw CPUs and get a cheap third-party fan?
If latter, how cheap of fan should I get in order to ensure I can overclock up to the point that further overclock may shorten its life or more expensive cooling device is required?
PS: I think I am going to pick Intel E2140/E2160/E2180, or E4500/E4600 because they are highly overclockable (60-100%) while AMD 64 X2 Dual Core are not (10-20%).
3. RAM
Overclocking-wise, what brand of RAM is good for overclockability?
What RAM speed (DDR2 667 or 800) should I get?
I don't want to spend any extra on RAM as the performance gain is very little. If possible, I will overclock RAM too.
I only want to make sure my RAM speed can keep up with my CPU FSB (1:1 ratio) after it is overclocked. But I have no idea normally what RAM speed I need in this case?
4. Motherboard
What do I need to pay attention when I buy a motherboard regarding the overclocking aspect? I know that a good motherboard is required if I want to overclock my CPU and RAM. But I don't know what factors/features I should look for when I pick a motherboard. Please show me some lights.
Thanks a lot.
It is my first time who want to overclock after reading some reviews that one can mildly overclock to get 60-100% gains. It looks impressive.
I am a mild overclocker only. I want to buy some cheap CPUs and overclock them (so they perform like a high-end CPU with less price).
My overclocking principles
I will overclock as much as possible provided that the following conditions are met:
- without shortening my component's life (a very small diminish is acceptable)
- don't spend any/much on cooling device (unless the gains surpass the costs)
1. How risky mild overclocking is?
Originally I think mild overclocking is very low risk. That's why I want to try. But I read someone wrote this in its overclocking guide on the net. This scares me a bit.
- When you overclock a PC, it's never truly stable. The PC was not designed to run with different things at different clock rates that aren't necessarily compatible with each other. What you gain in performance you lose in piece of mind: This thing could crash at any moment.
- Never overclock a PC with important data on it. Overclocking affects the memory and the CPU, and those in turn affect data written on the hard drive. Overclocking can end with corrupted data. You could lose stuff. Keep your overclocking relegated to gaming machines, graphics workstations—anything except a PC with mission-critical or personally-valuable data on it.
Never truly stable? What does it mean?
Does it mean I will still get some crashes or BSOD (although seldom) even though I overclock mildly. If so, it is not acceptable to me. I want to make sure my computer is very stable even after overclocking.
Never overclock if I store important data on a PC? Why?
Does it mean my overclocked PC, even if mildly, will still corrupt my data (although seldom)?
My PC is going to be all-purpose, from working to gaming. Of course hard disk will store personal data and collections. They are not vital but you don't want to lose them anyway. I believe many general users has one PC for all purposes. They will of course have some files or personal data that they value much. This suggestion seems to tell all general users to avoid overclocking.
Please comment and share your experiences.
My overclocking is moderate, not something going to the extreme.
2. Selection on cooling device
For a moderate overclocker like me, what cooling device would you advise me to get?
Should I use the stock fans supplied by the vendor?
Should I buy raw CPUs and get a cheap third-party fan?
If latter, how cheap of fan should I get in order to ensure I can overclock up to the point that further overclock may shorten its life or more expensive cooling device is required?
PS: I think I am going to pick Intel E2140/E2160/E2180, or E4500/E4600 because they are highly overclockable (60-100%) while AMD 64 X2 Dual Core are not (10-20%).
3. RAM
Overclocking-wise, what brand of RAM is good for overclockability?
What RAM speed (DDR2 667 or 800) should I get?
I don't want to spend any extra on RAM as the performance gain is very little. If possible, I will overclock RAM too.
I only want to make sure my RAM speed can keep up with my CPU FSB (1:1 ratio) after it is overclocked. But I have no idea normally what RAM speed I need in this case?
4. Motherboard
What do I need to pay attention when I buy a motherboard regarding the overclocking aspect? I know that a good motherboard is required if I want to overclock my CPU and RAM. But I don't know what factors/features I should look for when I pick a motherboard. Please show me some lights.
Thanks a lot.
0
Comments
OCing does shorten the lifespan. The way I see it is that it might last for 10 years, if I OC it might last for 5 (I've had CPUs OCd last longer). Even if thats true I will be begging for a new CPU in 5 years. The upgrade cycle is barely a year for me anyway so its not even a consideration.
As far as cooling, using the stock cooler/fan will probably shorten the lifespan than OCing with a better cooler.
I have never corrupted data because of my overclock. I have because I screwed up my OS install but never because I was OCing.
OC or not I would still get a better cooling device than the stock cooler from Intel or AMD. It will run cooler and quieter. Win/Win.
For OCing the best is sticks of RAM with Micron chips inside for DD2 or DDR3.
Keeing your RAM 1:1 with DDR2 800 will get you up to about 3.6GHz OC on an Intel E66/Q66 which is a nice OC and the ram will have more headroom after reaching stock speeds. DDR2 800 will be good, RAM is dirt cheap.
If going Intel, no other reason not to, get one with a Intel P35 chipset. Most should give you a moderate and above OC and still have upgradability. Choose something with the features you want.
I dont know where you got those numbers for how far an Intel CPU can OC compared to an AMD OC but most CPUs will not OC 100% and AMDs will OC more than 20%.
What parts to get?
Cooling: many stock heatsink-CPU combinations are already cooled well enough for mild overclocks. Learn what the heat tolerance of your CPU is by going to the manufacturer's site and looking it up. Use voltage and temperature monitoring software such as SpeedFan and Core Temp. Your question is difficult to answer concerning cooling. "Moderate" is not a precise term. If higher overclocks, meaning more than 10% above CPU rated speed, a quality, beefy heatsink is advisable with high quality thermal paste applied, such as Zalman's, Tuniq TX-2, or Arctic Silver.
Motherboards: steer away from the mass market boards that are designed for ordinary use. Almost anything that is found in an off-the-shelf computer is unsuitable for overclocking. Overclocking enthusiasts typically gravitate towards the higher end models from Gigabyte, Asus, Abit, and DFI. This list is not exhaustive. Keep in mind though, that a good overclocking motherboard need not be expensive. It just needs to be designed for higher than normal voltages and 'bus' frequencies. An example of such a motherboard is the Abit IP35-E. (Look in my signature for system No. 4) That motherboard is enabling a 1000MHz overclock. The cost before shipping of that motherboard was way less than $100. Of course, you will also need a CPU that is capable of achieving speeds beyond it's rated frequency. For overclocking, you also need a high-quality power supply unit. Most budget PSUs are capable only of running a computer a dead-stock speeds. For overclocking, you need very 'clean' voltages, power that fluctuates only when you change settings.
In short, the best way to find hardware that is overclocker friendly is to visit forums like this. Look at what people are using for overclocking. Observe a lot and ask lots of questions. Newegg's customer reviews are also a decent database for learning about overclock-worthy equipment.
EDIT: you'll notice I did not mention memory. Most overclocking motherboards have what are called "dividers," that is settings that will allow you to boost the CPU frequency while leaving the RAM at or near stock speed. The most important overclocking for improved speed is CPU overclocking. Yes, if you overclock the entire system, including the RAM, you will realize greater overall speed, but for performance the most important hardware is the motherboard and CPU. (but of course, none if it will be successful if you have a weak PSU)
My only complaint is the power consumption- there's a point where the power demand goes ridiculous- so I only overclock moderately. I live in a hot climate and the combined power cost for feeding and cooling overclocked beasts takes more dollars than sense.
All of the machines in my signature, except Alex, are overclocked. Note: The "Alex" rig is a laptop
Thank you. By the way, do you know whether there are some overclockability tests/reports for different RAM? It would be interesting if it has.
I don't think I will get E66XX/Q66XX because they are expensive. E66XX is not worth it in my humble opinion, especially so if you consider overclocking cheap E4XXX/E21XX (they can perform very close to non-OC E66XX). I would prefer QQ66XX since it is quad-core. But the performance gain is regressive and it is again expensive.
But I know AMD is going to release true quad-core CPU soon. I'm not sure how cheap it is. If it turns to be a value buy (price/performance-wise), I may have a harder time when I upgrade.
Intel P35 chipset... Thanks for the tips.
To clarify, I am talking about Intel E21XX/E4XXX vs AMD 64 X2 Dual-core 3800-6400+ series.
I read more and I find out some of AMD 64 X2 can gain 25-35% with moderate overclocking only (pushing Vcore to 1.56V at max). However some are very bad (only ~10%).
Here's the review:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/pentium-e2160_14.html
E2160 can be overclocked up from 1.8GHz to 3.4GHz (+90%) with moderate overclocking only. Clear winner even if I have bad luck and get 70% only.
Where can I find such info?
I tried to search in Intel, entering the serial number. I couldn't find this piece of info.
I think I will only use 1:1. It achieves the best result. Any asynchronous divider (even faster) will give significantly less performance gains. This comes with higher voltage and heats too. So I will stick with 1:1 only.
I plan to overclock Intel E21XX or E4XXX up to 3-3.33Ghz only. I read some can push up to 3.4-3.5GHz with moderate overclocking only, but I want to leave some room for stability/safety reasons.
How can I pick a good PSU? Any good PSU buying guide on the net?
Thank you.
Your money will be best spent with a nice P35 board like the Gigabyte P35-DS3R, a Q6600, some quality ram, and a good air cooling setup. Something like that would be robust enough to handle your novice attempt without easily breaking, and will be current enough where you won't have to upgrade for quite a while.
Basing your hardware decision on a reported percentage increase in speed over the stock setting isn't a good way of going about it. There's a lot more to system performance than just adding Mhz.
I hate to link away from this site, but a guy up on Tom's Hardware Forums did a very through job of explaining the whole mess. Be prepared for a long (perhaps confusing) read, though.
As far as PSU's are concerned: A few members here will recommend Hyper (myself included, using the 550W modular model now and it's a beauty) and a few others will recommend OCZ.
What things do you think I have made up?
I pretty much made up my mind as far as CPU is concerned.
(In fact I chose AMD dual-core initially. Someone advised me to overclock which I thought it was dangerous. I changed my mind finally, especially when many people comfort me that overclocking is not as risky as that article writer says)
Now I would go for lower-range Intel Dual-Core and overclock it up to the speed equal to the higher-range.
I haven't made up my mind as far as RAM, cooling device, PSU are concerned.
Anyway I want to discuss with people. I raise my doubts sometimes for their suggestions. It doesn't mean I am right and they are wrong. Well, different people have different considerations and there is no right or wrong. I asked because I want to understand why they decide to pick that brand or model. I will know if their choices suit my needs based on the reasons they give. Also I can know more how different people think.
After all, what's the point of asking questions if everything has been decided and won't be changed?
Thank you for your suggestion.
Well spot about the review of Buffalo Firestix PC2 6400. This RAM stick looks promising.
I want to read more to have a relative comparison.
Regarding the cooling device, it seems to be overbudget especially I want to do it simply because I want to go cheap (buy cheap CPU and squeeze some performance moderately). Let's see if I have such a need later. Thanks anyway.
Well, I do have a doubt regarding Q6600 especially you say the money will be best spent (I'm not sure if that means you think the CPU is worth it price/performance-wise.
Q6600 has 4 cores. I know 4 cores and better than 2 cores but it comes with a cost.
The performance difference between 1 vs 2 cores are larger than that of 2 vs 4 cores.
The price increase between 1 to 2 cores are smaller than that of 2 to 4 cores.
Price is not a problem as long as it is worht it, but it appears not in this case.
Sorry to give you such a wrong impression.
No. I know Mhz is not the only factor which affects the performance.
I read a benchmark report which tries to overclock an E2XXX/E4XXX CPU up to the same speed as an E6XXX.
Their performance is very close. What a great buy if I can overclock a cheap CPU and it performs very close to an non-OC E6XXX.
Their difference lies in the cache difference, but I seriously doubt what is the real world difference between 1MB vs 2MB, or 2MB vs 4MB.
We may notice a slight difference if we compare 1MB vs 4MB. However the price rise outweighs the gain.
If you consider the Internet as the whole, you haven't link away from anywhere. It is still within the circle.
A very good guide after all. Would spend me another 30 minutes.
Hmm... The themal specifications is very high (eg 73.2°C for E2160).
People even complain if their CPU goes above 50°C. They usually suggest 30-40°C.
Which is right? What should I do? As long as my CPU is below the suggested value, I don't need to buy third-party air cooler, right?
Thank you for the advice.
I realise some offer 3-year while others offer 5-year warranty.
I think I will pick a 5-year one because it shows the confidence of the manufacturer. Don't you think so?
Of course, it's your money and you can do with it as you please. I'm only offering the facts.
As expected.
I never fancy E6XXX. Both E6XXX and Q6XXX are high-end. 4 workers are clearly better than 2 workers, much more if more and more apps make use of multi-core.
Well, "oldness" has nothing to do with price/performance. It is a matter of how much you get vs how much you spend. I don't see how Q6600 can beat E2/4XXX in terms of price/performance.
Anyway, E2/4XXX isn't old (obsolete). The dual core rules in the mainstream market.
Well, Q6600 isn't worth price/performance-wise as a matter of fact. Of course it is subject to change when its price drop in future and become more popular.
Price/Performance Index:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=946&model2=882&chart=444
QQ6600 is in the bottom of the chart.
After all people value money differently. Some don't mind spending $100 just for 5% gain.
Anyway thanks for your replies.
But if you read the temperature specification, it reads 73.5*C.
That causes the confusion. It says it can go higher than 50*C. 50-60*C is still fine.
Pure price/performance comparisons mean nothing by themselves.
It is, after all, only money. At this point you've narrowed it down so much that any purchase you make is a win.
I'll also agree with this statement about the quad cores too. I recently upgraded my main rig from an E6600 to a Q6600 and I really see no difference in everyday performance with the quad over the dual core. But I participate in the Seti@Home project (and the Folding@Home project before that) and both of those applications do make good use of the extra 2 cores of the quad, so the upgrade was justified in my case.
Also, I would like to suggest that you also consider an E4xxx series C2D instead of the E2xxx series, due to the larger L2 cache of the E4xxx series. I have a feeling that losing the extra 1 MB of L2 cache on the E2xxx series could considerably affect some applications that are cache sensitive much more than the 4 MB > 2 MB dropoff does between the E6600 and the E4xxx series. After all, the Core architecture was derived in great part from the earlier Pentium M mobile processors and they saw a sizable increase in processing power when they went from the 1 MB L2 cache of the original release P-M to the 2 MB of L2 cache of the Dothan P-M processors. And finally, the last argument for the E4xxx series upgrade is that they aren't that much more than the E2xxx series.
As far as cooling goes, you will probably be fine with the stock cooler up to around 3 GHz, depending on your processor. I have read that the temps on the E2xxx and E4xxx series are a lot more variable than the higher priced C2D procs because they don't solder the core to the IHS but actually use the older style of attachment like AMD still uses. But that can also be a plus for the extreme overclocker as it is not too hard to remove the IHS off of a processor that isn't soldered to the processor slug, but also isn't anything someone just lightly dabbling in overclocking needs to do. If you do find the temps to be kind of high you can always buy a better aftermarket cooling solution later.
And for running dividers on your memory to overclock with; you won't see a performance difference running dividers that is noticeable except when playing benchmark games and even then it's minimal.
hahaha, still got my 1700+ running at 2.5gh after many years, not planning on selling tho. that was truly one great price/performance piece of hardware i bought in a long time, got it for around 50 dollars at that time.
Where there absolutely is trump power for quad and dual core CPUs is in comparison to single core. Going from one core to multi-core is a huge jump in real world performance.