Post by: rs owner on March 25, 2006, 04:50:33 AM
/smile.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\':)\' />
Post by: Jonathan Fu on March 26, 2006, 06:51:38 PM
Overclocking is, from Wiki is
Quote
Overclocking is the process of forcing a computer component to run at a higher clock rate than designed or designated by the manufacturer.[/font][/b][/color]
Overclocking is usually practiced by PC enthusiasts in order to increase the performance of their computers. Some hardware enthusiasts purchase low-end computer components which they then overclock, thereby attaining performance of a high-end system, while others will overclock high-end components, attaining levels of performance that surpass the peformance of the newest generation of computer hardware.
-Jonathan Fu
/cool.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\'B)\' />
Post by: rs owner on March 27, 2006, 04:45:03 AM
Post by: bobloblaw on March 27, 2006, 05:12:50 AM
Post by: rs owner on March 27, 2006, 09:33:16 AM
Post by: Josetann on March 30, 2006, 01:01:11 AM
If you take baby steps, you should be able to eek out a little more performance without any side effects whatsoever. If you go all out and bump the voltage to crazy levels and really push it, you could burn up more than just the processor. Also, most motherboards let you set the fsb separate from the rest of the components (forgive me, I can't remember the term right off). Basically, on an old motherboard if you ran at anything other than 66, 100, or 133MHz, you'd be running everything out of spec (ram, pci bus and thus hard drive, all your cards...etc.). Most now will let you play with the fsb separately, so everything else stays within spec (except maybe ram, but you can bump its speed down no problem).
Ok, short version, play it safe, do it gently, and you'll be fine. You won't get a huge overclock like many, but you also won't have to worry about your PC blowing up (well, you won't have to worry as much). Also, if you have an oem PC, i.e. Dell, Compaq, HP, etc., then you're outta luck. They lock down the bios so you can't overclock. May be ways around it, but probably not worth it.
Post by: rs owner on March 31, 2006, 02:21:13 PM
Post by: supraskater on May 01, 2006, 06:18:38 PM
If you take baby steps, you should be able to eek out a little more performance without any side effects whatsoever. If you go all out and bump the voltage to crazy levels and really push it, you could burn up more than just the processor. Also, most motherboards let you set the fsb separate from the rest of the components (forgive me, I can't remember the term right off). Basically, on an old motherboard if you ran at anything other than 66, 100, or 133MHz, you'd be running everything out of spec (ram, pci bus and thus hard drive, all your cards...etc.). Most now will let you play with the fsb separately, so everything else stays within spec (except maybe ram, but you can bump its speed down no problem).
Ok, short version, play it safe, do it gently, and you'll be fine. You won't get a huge overclock like many, but you also won't have to worry about your PC blowing up (well, you won't have to worry as much). Also, if you have an oem PC, i.e. Dell, Compaq, HP, etc., then you're outta luck. They lock down the bios so you can't overclock. May be ways around it, but probably not worth it.[/quote]
so your basicly saying only the "custom built" computers can be overclocked? Cause I have a HP
Post by: Beomagi on May 09, 2006, 10:00:00 AM
If you have an hp, then while it's possible to find a clockgen that works, your board isn't going to be designed the way an enthusiast board is designed - you'd lack voltage increments, fsb increments, the power phase to the chip wont be as overdone as say, a DFI or ABIT board.
As for decreasing the life - it depends on the manner of the overclock (as J0etann outlined), and the processor.
e.g. The athlon xp-m. These were desktop bartons retested at lower voltages to see if they'd work. You could take one of these and jsut increase the fsb from 266MHz to 400MHz, drop the multiplier to 2/3 it's value, and set the voltage to that of the desktop counterpart, and it would run almost guaranteed. You wont be decreasing the lifetime compared to the other desktop chips because it was designed to handle that voltage, only tested to run with less. after that keep in creasing the multiplier, and you'd get anywhere from 2.3 to 2.7GHz on the old athlon-xp core. Not bad at all for back then
e.g.2 The 2.4C northwood. If a company has as easy time making chips, they wont sell all at just high speed. They'd lose out on either low end if it's too costly, or high end if it's too cheap. So intel for a while underclocked their chips. 2.4C northwood pentium 4s would easily run at 3.0 to 3.2 GHz without any voltage increase. Keep in mind, these chips are TESTED and set; they're designed to run at these speeds. But either one test failed, or they had a glut of high speed chips and had to make up bottom.
e.g.3 The pentium-m/celeron-m on desktop. Intels hottest chip - surprised? There's a difference between power and temperature. The prescott runs at about 60-70C tops (safely) but produces up to 130W. Old pentium-m's were designed to run even at 100C, but produced only 30W. Why was it hotter? It was designed to handle being in a crappy environment - a laptop. Not much cooling. Oh the pentium 4 on your lap can cause burns - because the heat energy given off is sooo much, but the "hot" pentium-m on your lap barely made you sweat. When desktop boards were available, overclockers put desktop heatsinks on these, letting them safely pump voltages through it and overclock them without worry on shortened lifespans.
e.g.4 This is BAD
(http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/7829/28314jw.jpg)
The newcastle 130nm line doesn't like to be overclocked. The voltage isnt correct but i was still pushing 1.6+ which is scary. Only did that once, but if i had run this chip for a long time, then that would have burnt up easy
/smile.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\':)\' />
Post by: kusiobache on May 22, 2006, 08:32:01 PM
If you take baby steps, you should be able to eek out a little more performance without any side effects whatsoever. If you go all out and bump the voltage to crazy levels and really push it, you could burn up more than just the processor. Also, most motherboards let you set the fsb separate from the rest of the components (forgive me, I can't remember the term right off). Basically, on an old motherboard if you ran at anything other than 66, 100, or 133MHz, you'd be running everything out of spec (ram, pci bus and thus hard drive, all your cards...etc.). Most now will let you play with the fsb separately, so everything else stays within spec (except maybe ram, but you can bump its speed down no problem).
Ok, short version, play it safe, do it gently, and you'll be fine. You won't get a huge overclock like many, but you also won't have to worry about your PC blowing up (well, you won't have to worry as much). Also, if you have an oem PC, i.e. Dell, Compaq, HP, etc., then you're outta luck. They lock down the bios so you can't overclock. May be ways around it, but probably not worth it.[/quote]
wrong there in the last 2 sentences, they lock down on them, and they can tell if its messed up byoverclocking, but i got a dell and i overclocked it. its been 3 years smooth, running amazingly, and i got around it.(btw never open up a dell 2 see whats inside if ur curious. they ahve a red button in there and if tis opened the button pops out and then if u send it in 2 the factory popped out theyw otn do anything. maybe not for all dells but it is for mine and my friends)
Post by: muhahaha on May 26, 2006, 04:49:11 PM
If you have an hp, then while it's possible to find a clockgen that works, your board isn't going to be designed the way an enthusiast board is designed - you'd lack voltage increments, fsb increments, the power phase to the chip wont be as overdone as say, a DFI or ABIT board.
As for decreasing the life - it depends on the manner of the overclock (as J0etann outlined), and the processor.
e.g. The athlon xp-m. These were desktop bartons retested at lower voltages to see if they'd work. You could take one of these and jsut increase the fsb from 266MHz to 400MHz, drop the multiplier to 2/3 it's value, and set the voltage to that of the desktop counterpart, and it would run almost guaranteed. You wont be decreasing the lifetime compared to the other desktop chips because it was designed to handle that voltage, only tested to run with less. after that keep in creasing the multiplier, and you'd get anywhere from 2.3 to 2.7GHz on the old athlon-xp core. Not bad at all for back then
e.g.2 The 2.4C northwood. If a company has as easy time making chips, they wont sell all at just high speed. They'd lose out on either low end if it's too costly, or high end if it's too cheap. So intel for a while underclocked their chips. 2.4C northwood pentium 4s would easily run at 3.0 to 3.2 GHz without any voltage increase. Keep in mind, these chips are TESTED and set; they're designed to run at these speeds. But either one test failed, or they had a glut of high speed chips and had to make up bottom.
e.g.3 The pentium-m/celeron-m on desktop. Intels hottest chip - surprised? There's a difference between power and temperature. The prescott runs at about 60-70C tops (safely) but produces up to 130W. Old pentium-m's were designed to run even at 100C, but produced only 30W. Why was it hotter? It was designed to handle being in a crappy environment - a laptop. Not much cooling. Oh the pentium 4 on your lap can cause burns - because the heat energy given off is sooo much, but the "hot" pentium-m on your lap barely made you sweat. When desktop boards were available, overclockers put desktop heatsinks on these, letting them safely pump voltages through it and overclock them without worry on shortened lifespans.
e.g.4 This is BAD
(http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/7829/28314jw.jpg)
The newcastle 130nm line doesn't like to be overclocked. The voltage isnt correct but i was still pushing 1.6+ which is scary. Only did that once, but if i had run this chip for a long time, then that would have burnt up easy
/smile.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\':)\' />[/quote]Possible slight understatement
/biggrin.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\':D\' />
Post by: brent on June 28, 2006, 10:21:18 PM
Post by: WannabeHacker on July 02, 2006, 04:07:21 AM
/ph34r.gif\' class=\'bbc_emoticon\' alt=\':ph34r:\' /> Sorry for asking a stupid question, but what is clockgen?
Post by: New Era on August 08, 2006, 12:32:58 PM
Post by: White Fire on August 27, 2006, 08:31:46 PM
Post by: kingikz1001 on August 29, 2006, 04:18:10 AM
Post by: Tat on September 14, 2006, 10:32:46 PM
Post by: D rock on September 20, 2006, 01:32:29 PM
Post by: scaminisbadd on September 24, 2006, 02:32:32 PM
Post by: Holy Man on September 30, 2006, 10:54:42 PM
Post by: Rsowners on October 07, 2006, 07:56:10 AM