CPU Performance Tests

[manigma]

Why do you always underclock CPU speeds to benchmark CPU performance? You should overclock a bit (10-20%) so that we can know if overclocking is worth or not for gaming. You will get more hits on your page as people search for overclocking performance not underclocking.

I was posting this in below article but I think comments are disabled?? Why??

http://www.in.techspot.com/reviews/...u-performance/articleshow/51836914.cms?page=5

 

[cliffordcooley]

Whenever the review has an under-clock, there is a valid reason. You must have missed the reasoning.

The CPU reviews do have an over-clock. It is up to you to take an overclock from the CPU reviews, and place it in a gaming reviews. Surely from the data given you can come to a conclusion where you would stand with an over-clock. That is without adding useless (as in for the majority, not saying it is useless to you) data for everyone else read.

 

[manigma]

I did go through CPU reviews and read the below article (very old) but helpful:
https://www.techspot.com/article/932-amd-fx-8350-fx-6300-power-performance/

I have an FX 4300 overclocked to 4.8Ghz @ 1.356V running cool. My next upgrade will hopefully be the Ryzen.

I understand while testing "CPU performance" in gaming reviews, you undervolt a cpu to test game's stress on CPU. But being an overclocker, it would be really helpful if I could also see how a game performs when the CPU is overclocked (not underclocked).

So it would be great when you review a game's CPU performance, you also overclock the cpu a bit and put the same in your chart reviews.

For example in below review it would have been awesome to see AMD FX-9590 (4.70Ghz) and (5.00Ghz).

https://www.techspot.com/review/1263-gears-of-war-4-benchmarks/page4.html

We can then know if any modern games take benefit of overclocking too. Thanks!!