Popularity of overclocking

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by Staples, Jun 4, 2019.

  1. MajorYikes

    MajorYikes n00b

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2019
    I didn’t read every post in this thread but I was just talking about this recently. I think part of it is that overclocking isn’t what it used to be: but a decent motherboard and almost any chip, adjust multiplier and voltage. There’s a lot more to it now with more cores, boost clocks, K-series chips, process technology, etc.
     
  2. Motley

    Motley 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,452
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    Hey now, I have a civic. My mods are fart can (500hp) cold air intake ( 350hp) and a huge rear wing adding 1000hp. I blow by HellCats all day long.
     
    travm likes this.
  3. pendragon1

    pendragon1 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,877
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    lol isnt what it used to, flipping dip switches, moving jumpers, pencil trick etc...
     
    Mav451 likes this.
  4. Domingo

    Domingo [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    16,993
    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    It's easier than it has ever been...but it also doesn't really matter as much. An extra 2-5% in games doesn't really matter in most instances. It's not like you see it in typical desktop performance either. It's usually in very specific productivity apps or the rare game that relies on the CPU. It's great for those, but they're kinda few and far between. Tough to argue with free performance, though.
     
    Mav451 likes this.
  5. Motley

    Motley 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,452
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2005
    What I'm really confused/disappointed with OCing new CPUs. Is when we had all these new processor releases that we could OC from 2GHz to 3GHz. Next year would be 3 to 4GHz.

    Back then (2008) I thought in 2019 we'll have 9GHz OC's. But instead we got more cores and less overclocking. Given the choice, I'd rather have a 2 core that OC's to 9GHz.

    Its very strange how processor technology became what it is today. It has dramatically slowed compared to the good ole tech boom days.
     
  6. travm

    travm Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    301
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    The biggest issue is that 9ghz just isnt happening. Its more cores, or 5ghz. Turns out many workloads do scale with cores. Games even up to 8 in some cases (maybe more in some games i dont know about). Its only been since 28nm iirc that we've been at a clockwall. I expect they'll figure something out to get that up. Maybe 5nm? Maybe 14nm++++++++++-X/@++.
     
  7. freeagentt

    freeagentt n00b

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2018
    It took a lot more than a year to go from 2-3ghz and even longer to get from 3-4. Overclocking now a days is lame. And has been since Sandy Bridge. Before overclockers were dirty, bottom of the web feeders, now its mainstream and everyone and their grandma wants to do it.

    That's why its so easy now, so the masses can do it too. To lazy to oc? No problem. Got a 5ghz cpu for you right out of the box, can maybe get 200mhz extra out of it, if you spend half a grand on a nice loop.. but hey look at those numbers.
     
    N4CR and pendragon1 like this.
  8. chrisoutwright

    chrisoutwright n00b

    Messages:
    2
    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2019
    On the one hand there are OC extremists that always seem to get one of those CPUs that hit min. 5Ghz below 1.30v, and then noobs like me that can't get a 8700k stable at 4.9, because one did not consider AVX offsets. Just today it came to bear on me that the thermal headroom is getting less and less for OC without AVX offset unless one is delidding (and voiding the warranty) of that thing.

    For instance, i have a 7700k that hits the 90°C limit with 4.7 Ghz at 1.246/1.264v doing AVX work. At 5.0Ghz i need at least 1.316 vcore for non-AVX load but here my temps reach easily 90°C on a NH-D15 cooler. Solution? Find a vcore inbetween 1.290 and 1.246 so that AVX multiplier -2 and else 4.9Ghz give me acceptable temps. No guide helped me for this task, as it involves giving AVX load an vcore undervolt to achieve OK thermals.
    For my 8700k, i got in this temp zone only with at least 1.380 vcore, and it needed this for 4.9 Ghz non-AVX load, so a bad chip sadly, even in stock it needed vcores way higher than what I have seen in forums and due to the heat I filed a warranty claim.

    My old 2600k is able to maintain 4.7Ghz below 1.350v with temps below 77, even with AVX load. 4.8 Ghz will always fail on the other hand (watchdog timeout).

    My take would be that overclocking might have gotten easier with mainboards promoting OC-friendliness, but getting each specific cpu in a comfort zone has been an absolute nightmare in my case as either the thermals were being maxed out on safe vcore ranges or an OC would not pan out without finding AVX offsets to match and then vcores to match both load types.
    Just today I found out that there is a AVX bug to the C-states, and while playing TW Warhammer 2, I could compare the frequency switching occurences: C-states ON, upended the chart so that AVX offset would kick in over 70% of duty time. When off it was less than 30%. So I might get also a Bios fix then for microcode to see if the game actually uses AVX at all, even 30% seems to much.
    In my opinion OCing has gotten much harder to achieve and most often I would encounter CPUs on the verge of allowing any multiplier unlock or even defects on stock. Not a great experience to discover such things. The sad thing is that the more cores a CPU has, the higher the chances not all will work at the same frequency with equal vcore. Having fun adjusting each core with seperate vcore, i think this feature already exists with the newest mainboards. It's gotten all messier in my opinion.
     
  9. somebrains

    somebrains Gawd

    Messages:
    578
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2013
    Last 3 platforms I’ve been more interested in what voltage ranges are acceptable as a check on what my bios is inclined to do.
    This is x270, x299, b450.

    They want to oc for you, I probably won’t agree with the vendors definition of safe or daily use.

    Just look at x570 right now, not rocket science to learn what’s safe for ryzen and notice some boards drift far from spec.