As I'm sure is the case with many of you, I've owned several desktop systems over the years that depending on the timing and the class of processor, I've built to run at stock speeds or from scratch with overclocking in mind.
Heh, first comment? I'm typing on a e5200 with a 40% overclock, that is 2.5Ghz to 3.5Ghz with a craptastic heatsink, and idles at 42c (pre-overclock was 41c, so that's a win for me), and gets low 60s under load, not too bad honestly.
I overclock cuz well, I didn't want to buy a new CPU. I add new hardware much more often than replacing old hardware, and I don't like having wasted parts lying around. =o
My first PC I overclocked was my Dell PC when I purchased the new Gigabyte motherboard recently.
I managed to eek my Q8300 from 2.5GHz up to 3.34GHz, with it still being stable in use. For cooling I just use a Arctic Cooling Freezer Pro 7 (Rev2) with Arctic MX2 (or 3?) thermal paste. Temps are around 28-32'C at idle, and 48-52'C at full 100% load during stress testing with OCCT.
My reasoning for it was mainly to get a bit more power out of it, as purchasing the new motherboard has delayed my planned move over to a new chipset. With my GPU OC'd its made for a healthy improvement at medium settings in Crysis too!
I used to overclock my E6400 from 2.13GHz to 3GHz, but I found out that my 3D speeds were slower for some reason... So, I had to run at stock speed
Does anyone why that's happening? My overclock was stable according to IntelBurnTest by the way.
I started overclocking simply because I wanted to know how to.
There was a PC nobody wanted standing around doin' nothing, so ofcourse I simply had to try it out.
Noticing something amazing; an abandoned PC with an Intel Q8500 CPU...
With some minor adjustments to my gaming gear, I currently run that Intel Q8500 (stock: 3,16GHz) at 4,00GHz. However, overclocking beyond 3,99 GHz was nearly impossible (still trying to figure out why).
When I swapped my PSU to something more suitable, I managed to go from 3,99 to 4,00. Yay!
I have not considered overclocking, because the CPU has not been the leading cause of my perfomance issues. The hard disk is the performance issue I have. The hard disk is naturally the slowest component due to mechanical movement. So my focus has been how fast can I work with large files.
When you deal with huge images and lots of adjusting there is just no substitute for Overlocking get the CPU up as high as you can and your Cas# lat as low as possible. I've been an Overclocker sense the first day I picked up a 3D modeling program.
Currently Q9550 running @ 3.9Ghz
Ram Cas# Lat 4-4-4-12-21
I forget the numbers but my Video card is over 30% OC as well
Yes. Although I limit my CPU OC these days to whatever I can achieve on basically stock VID. Sometimes I get lucky and the first CPU out the gate will do 25-30%...and sometimes it takes a few CPU swap-outs to find the golden one. Thankfully with LGA775/1366 I've found a good cpu early - not willing to test Intel's 20 cpu fittings before possibly losing load plate tension recommendation.
Graphics cards on an application/game basis.
Q9550 at 3.8ghz. Air cooled by a Tower Tuniq. Solid. Once had a e8500 and it overclocked like a freaking NUT! from 3.16ghz to 4.2ghz on air!!!! That thing stood up to Crysis' face. Overclocking is always fun, I also overclocked my GTX465 (OMG WTF IS THAT!?) by a good 25% with even more room. but I'm happy with this for now.
A friend of mine and myself tried overclocking back in the Pentium 3 days (He was a computer tech at the time), the speed gain although impressive in the 3d benchmark made little if any performance difference in games. Haven't bothered since then.
hey guys i overclock cause i want to play may fav games at a respectable fps n my cpu overclocks 2.9 to 3.9 n i think that's good enough to stretch the legs of my graphics card, i also overclock my graphics card but i hasn't given me a good result.