Life Span of O/C Processors - Page 2

PsYkHoTiK · 1st May 2006, 08:54 PM

Principle of Economics.

Yet, I don't see how that applies to the discussion...

Like I said, it won't hurt your hardware as long as you keep the voltage to reasonable limits (+0.3v from stock is a rule of thumb) and you keep your load temps down (i personally keep things below 60C) and it will last as long as it's still useful...

ChampionLLY · 1st May 2006, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PsYkHoTiK

Principle of Economics.

Yet, I don't see how that applies to the discussion...

Like I said, it won't hurt your hardware as long as you keep the voltage to reasonable limits (+0.3v from stock is a rule of thumb) and you keep your load temps down (i personally keep things below 60C) and it will last as long as it's still useful...

PsYkHoTiK is the example that supports the principle.. lol

ok, not much I can do with controlling temperature of notebook..
the temperature sensors doesn't work with NHC..

Papercut · 1st May 2006, 09:49 PM

Personally I think +0.3V is really pushing it

PsYkHoTiK · 1st May 2006, 10:29 PM

Well I try not to approach that limit. But I will go close to get what I want (unless it outweighs it.)

Plus, the Economic problem applies to all, not just me. Nor does it have relevence to the titled thread.

Chai · 1st May 2006, 10:39 PM

I think 15% increase formula is more valid.

ChampionLLY · 1st May 2006, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PsYkHoTiK

Well I try not to approach that limit. But I will go close to get what I want (unless it outweighs it.)

Plus, the Economic problem applies to all, not just me. Nor does it have relevence to the titled thread.

okok, just kidding ok?

werty316 · 2nd May 2006, 01:36 AM

If you OC using stock voltages then the lifespan would be reduced as much if you increased the voltage and OC. I OC as high as I can go at stick voltages. Good cooling helps to reduce the life span. Basically if you run a cpu at 1.4V 24/7 and nother at 1.7V 24/7, and 1.7V cpu will die first most likely.

PsYkHoTiK · 2nd May 2006, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chai

I think 15% increase formula is more valid.

Yea I guess it is.

I think mine is just slightly over though...

I keep it that way coz I push the ram as well. Mine does 2.6GHz on stock volts (24hour prime stable.)

@ ChampionLLY: It's all good.

m0dD3r · 2nd May 2006, 02:38 AM

Meh, I've always wondered about this question too. I am happy with my 2.6C cuz it overclocked to 3.25Ghz 250FSB on stock voltage. With a slight increase of like 0.1V I can get 3.4Ghz stable but since I don't have anything above PC3200 RAM wise that's kinda pointless and hard to do. About the topic, my computer along 4 of my friends computers have been going strong for almost 3 years with overclocked systems and I see no problems as long as the OC'ing is done the right way and kept under control.

ice_water · 3rd May 2006, 06:00 PM

I think it is bad logic that overclocking always decreases the lifetime of a CPU. According to the logic, if I run a CPU at 2 GHZ and then overclock it to 2.1 GHZ then the lifetime will be less. I instead disagree with that logic. I believe it works differently, and that there is a "threshold" at which the lifetime is decreased, otherwise it has no effect. The trick when overclocking is to be smart and to not go to an extreme, so you experience all the benefits of a faster system without decreasing the lifespan of your CPU.

1st May 2006, 08:54 PM	#11 (permalink)
PsYkHoTiK "Little" Devil Join Date: 8 Apr 2004 Location: On the "throne" Posts: 14,320 Reputation: 4003 Rep Power: 59	Principle of Economics. Yet, I don't see how that applies to the discussion... Like I said, it won't hurt your hardware as long as you keep the voltage to reasonable limits (+0.3v from stock is a rule of thumb) and you keep your load temps down (i personally keep things below 60C) and it will last as long as it's still useful... __________________ Intel SLAPL 4.3GHz @ 1.35v : 2x2GB OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066 : Asus P5K Premium : WD Raptor X : G92 8800GTS 512mb 800MHz Core WIP : XFi Platinum : Silverstone OP650 : Silverstone TJ-07 : Vista Ultimate Edition : Dtek FuZion CPU : Swiftech MCW60 : MCP655 : Thermochill PA120.3 w Scythe Ultra Kaze : Tygon R3603 1/2" ID 3/4" OD CPU-Z: SLAPL : SLA9U : FX-55 : DDR 600 : VX www.techarp.com

1st May 2006, 09:49 PM	#13 (permalink)
Papercut Hyperactive Join Date: 14 Jul 2004 Location: Singapore! Posts: 4,990 Reputation: 2428 Rep Power: 33	Personally I think +0.3V is really pushing it __________________ PC Specs "Use in a cool dry place away from direct sunlight. Keep out of reach of n00bs. Overclock within 24 hours of opening. Do not read instructions before proceeding, do not use only as directed. May cause frustration, late nights and empty wallets. If symptoms persist please consult your hardware professional."

1st May 2006, 10:29 PM	#14 (permalink)
PsYkHoTiK "Little" Devil Join Date: 8 Apr 2004 Location: On the "throne" Posts: 14,320 Reputation: 4003 Rep Power: 59	Well I try not to approach that limit. But I will go close to get what I want (unless it outweighs it.) Plus, the Economic problem applies to all, not just me. Nor does it have relevence to the titled thread. __________________ Intel SLAPL 4.3GHz @ 1.35v : 2x2GB OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066 : Asus P5K Premium : WD Raptor X : G92 8800GTS 512mb 800MHz Core WIP : XFi Platinum : Silverstone OP650 : Silverstone TJ-07 : Vista Ultimate Edition : Dtek FuZion CPU : Swiftech MCW60 : MCP655 : Thermochill PA120.3 w Scythe Ultra Kaze : Tygon R3603 1/2" ID 3/4" OD CPU-Z: SLAPL : SLA9U : FX-55 : DDR 600 : VX www.techarp.com

1st May 2006, 10:39 PM	#15 (permalink)
Chai Administrator Join Date: 6 Oct 2002 Location: Maranello Posts: 26,757 Reputation: 3984 Rep Power: 72	I think 15% increase formula is more valid. __________________ Chai (Contributor & Forum Admin) http://www.techarp.com/

2nd May 2006, 01:36 AM	#17 (permalink)
werty316 Active Join Date: 3 Mar 2005 Posts: 642 Reputation: 138 Rep Power: 5	If you OC using stock voltages then the lifespan would be reduced as much if you increased the voltage and OC. I OC as high as I can go at stick voltages. Good cooling helps to reduce the life span. Basically if you run a cpu at 1.4V 24/7 and nother at 1.7V 24/7, and 1.7V cpu will die first most likely. __________________ Guns don't kill people, Chuck Norris kills people!

2nd May 2006, 02:38 AM	#19 (permalink)
m0dD3r Warming up Join Date: 20 Jul 2005 Posts: 89 Reputation: 28 Rep Power: 0	Meh, I've always wondered about this question too. I am happy with my 2.6C cuz it overclocked to 3.25Ghz 250FSB on stock voltage. With a slight increase of like 0.1V I can get 3.4Ghz stable but since I don't have anything above PC3200 RAM wise that's kinda pointless and hard to do. About the topic, my computer along 4 of my friends computers have been going strong for almost 3 years with overclocked systems and I see no problems as long as the OC'ing is done the right way and kept under control. __________________ Intel Pentium 4 2.6C @ 3.333Ghz 256FSB ASUS P4P800 Deluxe BIOS 1019 2GB Crucial Ballistix Z503 2-2-2-5 410Mhz ATI Radeon X850XTPE 550Core 610Mem 160GB Maxtor 8MB Cache 80GB WDJB 8MB Cache NuTech DDW-081 DVD-RW NZXT Nemesis Elite Black Case Logitech MX1000 w/ Teflon Skates Logitech X-530 on Audigy 2 ZS 7.1

3rd May 2006, 06:00 PM	#20 (permalink)
ice_water Newbie Join Date: 3 May 2006 Posts: 2 Reputation: 15 Rep Power: 0	I think it is bad logic that overclocking always decreases the lifetime of a CPU. According to the logic, if I run a CPU at 2 GHZ and then overclock it to 2.1 GHZ then the lifetime will be less. I instead disagree with that logic. I believe it works differently, and that there is a "threshold" at which the lifetime is decreased, otherwise it has no effect. The trick when overclocking is to be smart and to not go to an extreme, so you experience all the benefits of a faster system without decreasing the lifespan of your CPU.