Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Dream Machine ( Build your own PC ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: peter michaelson who wrote (957)	6/1/1998 8:15:00 AM
From: Dave Hanson	Respond to of 14778

Overclocking, Tom's cite, PIIs Hi Peter, I'll just toss out a brief comment, then let Networm or others add their 2c. Overclocking can reduce the life of a chip by running it outside of its spec, pushing it to higher wattages (and temperatures) than it was designed to function at. In general, I think that all but modest overclocking is inadvisable for anyone who depends upon their computer. A OC'd CPU which is damaged is not elligible for warranty service, and can be the cause of sudden and random lockups when everything looks fine on the surface. Having said that, it's often OK and entirely safe to modestly overclock a chip marked as being at the low end of a design range (eg, the 233s in the 233-300 MHz PII range, or the 166 Mhz MXX Pentiums,) since they are typically the exact same silicon used to function at the higher range--especially after the chip line has been out for several months, and the chip fabs have gotten the production. It's just that they've only been tested and certified at the lower clock speed. I've OC'd several 166 MXX chips to 233 with nary a problem--they still run cool, and I have little doubt they'll last for as long as they're used. (Because of their volume and stringent design standards, Intel chips are usually the best candidates for doing this.) While I have no doubt that I could have pushed several chips significantly higher than this, I have had no interest in trying. The modest, often unnoticable performance benefits are simply not worth the risk. Observable performance bottlenecks are much more significant elsewhere anyway (hard drive access speed, available RAM, etc.) There are multiple issues here RE how much OC'd chips can actually affect "real world" performance--whether it's a Pentium, PII, or other system, what the bus speed is, etc. that's covered pretty well on Tom's site and elsewhere. The best answer is, typically not much in non-game apps. It's a game for lots of hobbyist types to see just how far they can push their CPU, and there's kind of a cult of bragging rights about this in many places on the internet. I guess that covers the high points.