Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If my computer is mostly used for gaming will I see anything signifigant if I get my CPU 400 Mhz faster?
Thanks danny, I can always count on you to give a very informative answer. You rock bro
This is a really good question and i think it was well answered. I myself am faced with the idea of taking my q6600 to the much sought after 3.0-3.4 range but not sure what real world difference i would see, plus id have to buy a new case (cant fit even an ac pro 7 in my case), new cooler(non-stock) and go thru the hastle of putting it in the new case, regardless im at 2.7 just for kicks.....maybe i can do 3.0 with a stock cooler....
think ill just save up 200 and get a decent case (maxt silverstone tower) and a corsair 520 watt ....brithday only 2 months away!
yea i was thinking the same, the extra space would just mean better cooling anyhow and be more future proof for upgrades. At a local frys they have the antec p180 silver for 69.99...should i pull the trigger?
It really seems that their is still benefit for 3ghz to 3.6ghz and 4ghz, just depends on the game you play I guess!
But 1.7v is a bit scary What temps were you getting for that?
Nope. Once you start gaming at above 1280x1024 or so, CPU clock speed does not matter than much. You will see zero increases from a 400Mhz increase in games. Read this article:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/cpu-scaling-in-games-with-quad-core-processors/
Note the 2.4Ghz Q6600 and the 3Ghz E8400. In a majority of the games, they perform virtually the same.
Pro:
- Knowing that you have a 4GHz CPU
Con:
- Might require extra voltage past 1.4V to hit 4Ghz
- Has zero benefits with most games
Low 70's is alot...as 65'C is highest ceiling for any overclock.....low 70's is dodgy.....
Temperatures in the 70s are perfectly safe for these CPUs.
I wouldn't recommend that..and I don;t think so, because as soon as the ambient and room temperatures increase, it will no longer be low 70's. It will be boiling and unstable.
Not recommended by you is one thing, but according to Intel 100c is max for the chip. Stability should be constant through it's working temperature range. I've seen Q6600's in the mid 80's with no ill effects. Some OEM systems with Q6600's run stock in the 80's due to lack of airflow in the case, and they run perfectly fine.
IMO stability with overclocking is in the eye of the beholder. If a Q6600 system is unstable while hitting 70c+ I doubt it's due to temperature, more like lack of voltage and the unwillingness of the user to push the chip harder, which is understandable considering the cost of investment.
I wouldn't recommend that..and I don;t think so, because as soon as the ambient and room temperatures increase, it will no longer be low 70's. It will be boiling and unstable.
That doesn't even make any sense. The fact is that these CPUs are designed to operate at temperatures much higher than 70C, hence why Tjmax is around 100C for most Intel CPUs.
And isn't 1.7v dangerously high? Don't you get some kind of voltage migration or something like that that can slowly fry your chip? By slowly I might cutting its lifespan from years to a few weeks?
Yes. 1.7v on a 65nm Core 2 without some form of water or sub-zero cooling is definitely not a good idea for continuous operation.