Overclocking..when to stop?

interesting......

Here is a perfect example of watch what you read.

this guy never told you what res and settings the gaming he kept talking about took place, and no you will not notice a big difference between 33 and 36 fps but you will between 33 and 50 fps.

secondly was he talking about the cpu ocing while he was talking about the fps business? if so then he must be back in 2000 when everbody's res was still 1200 x 1000 and cpu ocing made a big difference in games, now in days in these higher res of 1600 x 1200 and 1900 x 1200, the gpu makes the biggest difference, far cry 2 with a 920 oced to 3.8 with 2 x 275 can give you 50 to 60 fps at 1900 x 1200 res, now a 920 oced to 3.8 but with 1 x 275 will not give you that, you can oc the cpu to 4.2GHz, and you still not gonna get that.

so if this guys was talking about cpu ocing when he was talking about fps then somebody needs to call him and let him know that the dinosaur era is over, and that he should update his info/data.

Now if he was talking about gpu ocing, then again he was wrong, first off you are not going to get 50 to 60 fps from 1 x 275 @ 1900 x 1200, no matter how much you oc it, just like you are not going to get 50 to 60 fps in far cry 2 at 2560 x 1600 no matter how much you oc a 5870, so to get more fps at today's res, you need a second gpu or a more single gpu solution.

he also never explain what settings, was it highest in the game? what kind of aa and af are we talking about?

and last if you don't game you don't need to oc?

thats got to be dumbest thing I have ever heard followed by the dumbest reason I have ever heard.

so the reason none gamers don't need to oc is because this guy does not sit there and watch the video encode.

lets look at this dumbasse's comments a bit closer shall we, maybe we can let the pressure out so that our heads don't explode from such stupidity.

1. Of course he does not sit there and watch it, he obviously has a slow processor that takes a long time, so who wants to sit there for hours and watch that. If he had oced his cpu tho, the process would have taken a lot less time and perhaps not long at all so it would not be a matter of sitting there and watching it.

2. this dumbass must barely ever use his pc, cause let me tell you, who the hell wants to sit there and do nothing so the encoding goes as smooth as possible and unlike this dumbass I don't have 2 hours to not be on the computer, somebody let mr. dumbass know that some of us use the pc much more often then his dumbassness.

3. now this part is the beauty, the reason to not oc is because dumbass does not sit there to watch the encoding therefore who cares how long it takes. Let me see, hmmm, oh ya, thats right, THE WORLD IS BIGGER THEN YOUR STUPID LIFE IDIOT, JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T WORK ON THE PC MUCH AND DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE ENCODING TO GET DONE, DOES NOT MEAN THE REST OF THE WORLD IS DOING THE EXACT SAME THING, SOME OF US SIT IN FRONT OF THE PC ALL DAY AND DON'T HAVE TIME TO WASTE, I MEAN FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, AT LEAST TELL ME/SHOW ME HOW OCING MAKES LITTLE DIFFERENCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT PLEASE DON'T TELL ME NOT TO OC BECAUSE YOU DON'T SIT INFRONT OF YOUR PC, THATS YOU, WTF DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ME??? THATS LIKE SAYING "WHEN YOU GET A HEADACHE, ITS POINTLESS TO TAKE PAIN KILLERS, CAUSE WHEN I GET A HEADACHE, I JUST OCCUPY MY MIND WITH SOMETHING ELSE AND TRY TO FORGET ABOUT THE PAIN TILL ITS GONE". GIVE ME A FING BREAK, ITS EXACTLY IDIOTS LIKE THIS THAT PUT OUT BS ON THE WEB.

4. last who decides what is cost effective? maybe going from 2 hours to 1 1/2 is not cost effective to him, but it very well could be to others, his whole article is based on what is going on in his world/life, as if the whole world's life is a duplicate of his.

5. he is doing awful lot of assuming, he is assuming that your cpu runs at 3.3GHz, he is assuming your oc is 3.7GHz. false false false, again out dated. Now in days let me see him get a 920 stock and encode with that at 2.6GHz and I will encode with a 920 oced to 3.8Ghz and lets if he notices the big difference. Or if his argument is that he has a 960, then what cost effectiveness is he talking about? I can get cooling for a 920 and OC it to 3.8GHz for less his 960 cost.

6. somebody explain to this guy that time is money, maybe his time is cheap but the rest of us value our time, even a 10% save on time is a big deal to many people. if ocing saves 10 or 15 minutes or so off of that hour, then thats 15 mintes.

now some of the stuff about fps and eyes being able to tell and all that was true, so that stuff was correct but the main point of the article is stupid/outdated/incorrect and simply dumb.

well I feel better now, I thought my head was gonna explode after reading that, that was a close one

Edited by DST4ME - 05 Feb 2010 at 7:26am

You know, I wasn't going to bother commenting on this article originally, it is nothing but a source of eye rolling for me, and I figured the less people commented on this thread the less people would end up reading the thread/article and the better off the world would be for it. However it ended up annoying me so much I decided that I'll throw my comments in anyway as long as others are.

There is so much wrong with the article that I could really pick it apart and go to town but I think I'll just stick to two points which invalidate the whole thing.

1.) Time saved is cumulative. Only spend half an hour on a computer every few days? Maybe overclocking isn't for you. Maybe computers aren't for you. Myself, I easily average over 10 hours a day on computers, more than that really, but we're going to pretend I have a wonderfully exciting social life and stick with 10. Even a paltry 15% improvement could easily save me over an hour a day of wasted time. This adds up real fast, within just a year this is over 547 hours down the drain, close to a month worth of waiting because I didn't feel like making a quick tweak in the BIOS.

2.) What? 15%? You can go buy yourself a $999 3.33GHz i7-975 and be a happy smug little clam in your own little world, but I think I'll buy a $280 i7-920, a $40 aftermarket cooler, and overclock it to 3.75GHz or more, thats an over 40% gain. My i7-920 will run faster, run cooler, and run quieter, all for less than a third of the price. The only downside is the extra room taken up by the cooler.

I think I'll stop there, I really see no reason to say any more on the matter. I would just like to echo DST4ME and say this is a perfect example of watch what you read.

problem with most data is that it is mostly wrong. lol I can post numbers to make nearly any product look superior to another or vice versa.Certain products will be strong at a certain level/resolution/ ect So be very careful where you get your data from.. I trust my own data, for the most part, lol Always a chance to make a mistake... And a few other peoples data, but if you want to know for sure, and you have the knowledge and means to do it, test it yourself...

I like to keep it simple as possible, so it hopefully can be understood by all.