A
Adam Albright
Guest
Re: Over-Clocking in Vista 64
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:01:58 +0100, "dennis@home"
<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
>> What no doubt will surprise some is all CPUs in the same family of the
>> same design are IDENTICAL internally. A CPU rated to run at 3.1 GHz is
>> the same as one rated 2.8 GHz.
>
>They are not the same.. one has passed a series of tests that allow the
>manufacturer to gurantee it will run at the intended speed reliably.
You need to improve how you read for comprehension. I said two chips
of the same design in the same family are the same internally. One
tested to run at X speed, the other at Y speed. You actually are just
confirming what I said.
>> I've always overclocked all my computers for many years back when it
>> was just a geek thing requiring messing with the chip itself to unlock
>> it's potential.
>I used to over clock things but the performance gains aren't usually worth
>the bother.
Then you confirm you really don't know what you're doing. I already
came to that conclusion reading some of your other posts. ;-)
>I more often underclock stuff these days to keep it cool and quiet.
For sure you don't know what you're doing then! LOL!
How cool and quite a system is depends on how your build it. I guess I
know better than you. Two critical things many get wrong. First they
put too much heatsink compound between the CPU chip and heatsink. Some
follow the Tammy Faye school foolishly thinking more is better where
she thought you're suppose to put makeup on with a trowel. Same with
heatsink compound, all that's needed is a very thin evenly spread
layer.
Next is the heatsink and fan. I always use a premium one. While not
the same make or model I'm using, following illustrates the concept.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835118223
All Copper and a oversized design combined with a variable speed fan
keeps things very cool AND quite. I can't even hear it since the CPU
fan most of the time is loafing along at under 1,000 RPM, sometimes it
even stops for awhile just the heatsink itself is enough to keep the
CPU cool. Hint: Copper disperses heat very well.
>Remember stable means many things.. one user might think that running a day
>is stable others a year.
>What do you call stable?
This system running nine months never overheats. Since it is on and
frequently under stress rendering videos which is a CPU intensive task
while I'm chatting in newsgroups and doing other work, it is under
load from typically 8AM to 9PM sometimes longer seven days a week.
My point is IF you do it correctly overclocking is both easy and safe.
It also provides noticeable benefits in performance gains. I'm not
some nut that tries to push things to the limit trying to double the
CPU's speed. I'm happy with a 40-50% increase which depending on how
you use your computer can pay dividends in performance and time saved.
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:01:58 +0100, "dennis@home"
<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
>> What no doubt will surprise some is all CPUs in the same family of the
>> same design are IDENTICAL internally. A CPU rated to run at 3.1 GHz is
>> the same as one rated 2.8 GHz.
>
>They are not the same.. one has passed a series of tests that allow the
>manufacturer to gurantee it will run at the intended speed reliably.
You need to improve how you read for comprehension. I said two chips
of the same design in the same family are the same internally. One
tested to run at X speed, the other at Y speed. You actually are just
confirming what I said.
>> I've always overclocked all my computers for many years back when it
>> was just a geek thing requiring messing with the chip itself to unlock
>> it's potential.
>I used to over clock things but the performance gains aren't usually worth
>the bother.
Then you confirm you really don't know what you're doing. I already
came to that conclusion reading some of your other posts. ;-)
>I more often underclock stuff these days to keep it cool and quiet.
For sure you don't know what you're doing then! LOL!
How cool and quite a system is depends on how your build it. I guess I
know better than you. Two critical things many get wrong. First they
put too much heatsink compound between the CPU chip and heatsink. Some
follow the Tammy Faye school foolishly thinking more is better where
she thought you're suppose to put makeup on with a trowel. Same with
heatsink compound, all that's needed is a very thin evenly spread
layer.
Next is the heatsink and fan. I always use a premium one. While not
the same make or model I'm using, following illustrates the concept.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835118223
All Copper and a oversized design combined with a variable speed fan
keeps things very cool AND quite. I can't even hear it since the CPU
fan most of the time is loafing along at under 1,000 RPM, sometimes it
even stops for awhile just the heatsink itself is enough to keep the
CPU cool. Hint: Copper disperses heat very well.
>Remember stable means many things.. one user might think that running a day
>is stable others a year.
>What do you call stable?
This system running nine months never overheats. Since it is on and
frequently under stress rendering videos which is a CPU intensive task
while I'm chatting in newsgroups and doing other work, it is under
load from typically 8AM to 9PM sometimes longer seven days a week.
My point is IF you do it correctly overclocking is both easy and safe.
It also provides noticeable benefits in performance gains. I'm not
some nut that tries to push things to the limit trying to double the
CPU's speed. I'm happy with a 40-50% increase which depending on how
you use your computer can pay dividends in performance and time saved.