cheap quad cores

Discuss stuff not about Indigo.
User avatar
psor
1st Place Winner
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 1:25 am
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Post by psor » Sat Dec 15, 2007 8:39 am

@dougal2

Hehe, ... that's what a lot of ppl think! :P :D ;)

But you can save a lot of energy when you are just writing a letter, email ...
blaaahhh, and underclock the other cores not needed! You might imagine
there are some ppl that do NOT render 24/7/365! ;o))

"That's the point!" And I think it's a good point. Even I know saving energy
is for the most "nerds" something that they are not even considering! :roll:

But this leads to another discussion that doesn't fit into this thread. :twisted: :? :wink:



take care
psor
"The sleeper must awaken"

Wedge
Posts: 441
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 11:33 am
Location: East Coast, USA

Post by Wedge » Sat Dec 15, 2007 4:32 pm

I have to ask an obvious question: Whats the point of overclocking a quad core processor? I understand back in the day people overclocked Pentium 3 processors and stuff but why now? (I used to overclock my Pentium 3 500mhz processor :))

I don't overclock my AthlonXP because I can't stand the loud fans and with hot summers where I live, it is already tough to keep a computer cool.

Imagine 4x3ghz processors (quad core), so 12ghz, why OC for more? Is it really worth the trouble? By trouble I mean the problems that seem to pop up after a system has been overcloked. Maybe when the room is hotter than normal, or you have a new piece of software that puts more stress on your PC and it freezes or something.

So this is my opinion, and now that I asked my question, can somebody give me some insight as to why overclocking is still a big thing? (or is it?) I didn't mean to offend by this post and I am sorry if I did. A detailed response would be ideal. (considering cost for various things related to coverclocking, better cooling parts, noise, and increased energy usage)

Keep in mind I am not against overclockers, and back in my day I was one. If I were to look 5 or 10 years ahead, and if there was a 50ghz processor, would people try to overclock it to 55ghz? And if so, why?
Content contained in my posts is for informational purposes only and is used at your own risk.

User avatar
Kram1032
Posts: 6649
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:55 am
Location: Austria near Vienna

Post by Kram1032 » Sat Dec 15, 2007 8:53 pm

I'm sure, if there was a 50Ghz Processor, ppl would try to overclock it to 75Ghz xD

User avatar
CoolColJ
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:47 pm

Post by CoolColJ » Sat Dec 15, 2007 9:43 pm

Intel will have a new platform towards the end of next year - so new socket, new motherboards and 8 cores :)

If you buy now, get the new Intel quads, they run so much cooler than the Q6600 and clock way higher

User avatar
dougal2
Developer
Posts: 2532
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 8:17 am
Location: South London

Post by dougal2 » Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:35 am

CoolColJ wrote:Intel will have a new platform towards the end of next year - so new socket, new motherboards and 8 cores :)

If you buy now, get the new Intel quads, they run so much cooler than the Q6600 and clock way higher
hang on, did I just understand that you said

"buy the expensive CPU that will be obsolete by the end of the year" ?

Sorry if I misunderstood, but there's no way I'm going to do that.


Re: overclocking.
People do it because they can. The CPU is quite easily capable of performing at a certain level, and if that level is greater than the default settings, then why not adjust the settings to get maximum performance?
I know there's downsides to doing it - temperature, lifespan, etc - but some people see stock settings as a lost potential.

Post Reply
20 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests