Overclocking

[JameStar]

Most people don't realize that overclocking the card also shortens the
life-span of the hardware on the card.
Just an FYI

 

[Don Burnette]

Most people don't realize that overclocking the card also shortens the
life-span of the hardware on the card.
Just an FYI

Perhaps. But from what to what?

I have yet to shorten the lifespan of a card or processor shorter than the
time I normally keep a video card or processor in my system.

 

[bob cox]

I'd give matchpoint to Don on this one. Overclock away kids, it won't
hurt. You don't intend to own that Radeon in three weeks anyway.

 

[J.Clarke]

"And for those who say overclocking isn't worth the risk because it
doesn't make that much difference in performance, you just keep
puttering along in the slow lane. That roaring blur on your left will
be me, leaving you in the dust ;>)"

Amazing. Only in the computer industry is a 2% performance improvement
viewed as creating "a roaring blur".

 

[Skid]

Unless you keep a video card long past the point where it can play current
games at reasonable performance levels, you're going to replace it well
before it burns out.

I'm a card-carrying cheap bastard. But unless I swap to a newer card every
other year or so -- and buy one step below the bleeding edge -- it's just
too painful to be unable to play the latest and greatest games with the eye
candy turned on and framerates faster than my kid sister can flip her math
cards.

In my case, overclocking actually lets me hang onto my cards LONGER, because
that way I can get maximum performance out of aging hardware. Case in point:

For more than a year now, I've been running a $159 Sapphire Radeon 9500
non-pro. Modding it with a drop of conductive paint and overclocking it
turned it into a 9700 Pro -- at the time a $400 card. After a year of hard
use, it's still running stronger than the newly released 9600XT (or Nvidia's
5700 ultra.) I suspect it will do fine with the upcoming HL2 and Doom3 that
everyone else is spending hundreds of bucks upgrading for.

In other words, overclocking allows me to sit out a whole generation of
cards and jump in when the bang-for-buck curve hits just the right spot.

And for those who say overclocking isn't worth the risk because it doesn't
make that much difference in performance, you just keep puttering along in
the slow lane. That roaring blur on your left will be me, leaving you in the
dust ;>)

 

[Dirty Harry]

"And for those who say overclocking isn't worth the risk because it doesn't
make that much difference in performance, you just keep puttering along in
the slow lane. That roaring blur on your left will be me, leaving you in the
dust ;>)"

Hell yea man, I'll be just up the raod with my overlocked 9800pro. As for
shortening the life of the card, please, maybe you should leave your system
turned off then it will last even longer! As long as u manage the heat the
odds are it will run for 20 years
DH

 

[Skid]

Amazing. Only in the computer industry is a 2% performance improvement
viewed as creating "a roaring blur".

Where in the world do you get 2 percent? My 3DMark scores went up more than
30% and actual framerates in games in games went up at least 20 percent and
often significantly higher.

Don't take my word for it, here's a review featuring the 128-meg Sapphire
9500 non-pro I started out with, and the 9700 Pro I wound up with. In an
Alpha build of Doom III, a game that's going to encourage a lot of folks to
upgrade, the stock 9500 turned in a respectable but uninspiring 35 fps. The
9700 Pro scored 64 fps. You do the math. A bit better than 2%, eh?

Not bad for free, especially considering that I would have had to pay a 150
percent premium to buy a card with the same performance.

That is indeed amazing, IMHO.

Nobody is twisting any arms to encourage overclocking. But's it's downright
silly to pretend the results are too small to be worth the bother.

Next you'll be telling me I didn't gain much by overclocking my P4 2.4 at
200 fsb to 3.3ghz at 275.

 

[bob cox]

I agree, I squeeze the extras out of my 9700 Pro with software oc'ing,
then hard-flash the bios when I think stable speeds are attained.
With ramsinks to keep the ram temp stable and stock gpu cooling, I can
get crazy and I'm still safe. It's like getting a 9800. My 9700 pro
should be good to go for years, and I feel I haven't even begun to
cool the gpu like I could if I wanted too.

 

[Dirty Harry]

Thank you skid, my mod was a spapphire 9800(325/325mhz) non pro that i
flashed with the ati pro bios(375/337mhz) and the gpu overclocks up to 420
with rage 3d tweak, mem does 348. Most i the time i just leave it at the
pro speeds...

"> Not bad for free, especially considering that I would have had to pay a
150

percent premium to buy a card with the same performance."

Exactly, sapphire radeon is somewhere around a hun cheaper...

 

[J.Clarke]

Where in the world do you get 2 percent? My 3DMark scores went up more
than 30% and actual framerates in games in games went up at least 20
percent and often significantly higher.

Hardly a "roaring blur".

Don't take my word for it, here's a review featuring the 128-meg
Sapphire 9500 non-pro I started out with, and the 9700 Pro I wound up
with. In an Alpha build of Doom III, a game that's going to encourage
a lot of folks to upgrade, the stock 9500 turned in a respectable but
uninspiring 35 fps. The 9700 Pro scored 64 fps. You do the math. A bit
better than 2%, eh?

Still hardly a "roaring blur".

Not bad for free, especially considering that I would have had to pay
a 150 percent premium to buy a card with the same performance.

That is indeed amazing, IMHO.

You're easily amazed then.

Nobody is twisting any arms to encourage overclocking. But's it's
downright silly to pretend the results are too small to be worth the
bother.

Next you'll be telling me I didn't gain much by overclocking my P4 2.4
at 200 fsb to 3.3ghz at 275.

You didn't. Get that puppy to 4.8 GHz and I'll find the improvement
worthwhile if it's reliable. But I'm not going to be _impressed_ until
you get it to 24.

I remember the first machine I overclocked. It was a 4 MHz Z-80 that I
overclocked to 6. A bit more percentagewise than you managed with your
P4. Ten years from now your P4 is going to seem just as quaint.

 

[Dark Avenger]

Most people don't realize that overclocking the card also shortens the
life-span of the hardware on the card.
Just an FYI

So instead of 15/10 years the card will work for 5/10 years.

.... tell me do you game on 15 year old cards?

 

[Skid]

Well, John, you are the ultimate authority on everything, including the
quantitative definition of "roaring blur." And here I thought a stable
overclock of nearly a gigahertz was a good thing, and getting the
performance of a $400 video card for $159 was pretty sweet.

Thanks for keeping me humble. I guess I could never impress a guy who
overclocked a Z-80.

But then, the only one who can impress you seems to be you -- and
vice-versa.

 

[J.Clarke]

Well, John, you are the ultimate authority on everything, including
the quantitative definition of "roaring blur."

If I'm driving along at 60 MPH and something passes me going 80 MPH,
it's clearly visible and unless it's got a busted exhaust it's not
roaring. Hence a 30% improvement is not "a roaring blur". Now if I'm
driving along at 60 MPH and an F15 goes over down on the deck in full
burner, it cannot be seen clearly and it is making a loud noise, hence
_that_ is a "roaring blur".

And you aren't getting anywhere near the performance difference
between a car at 60 MPH and an F15 in full burner.

Perhaps if you ever see a roaring blur yourself you'll understand why
you fell short of the mark.

And here I thought a
stable overclock of nearly a gigahertz was a good thing, and getting
the performance of a $400 video card for $159 was pretty sweet.

A plum is a good thing and pretty sweet. Do you find plums to be
impressive? And the fact that you have a good, pretty sweet thing does
not mean that you should put down others who don't find your good, sweet
thing quite to their taste.

Thanks for keeping me humble. I guess I could never impress a guy who
overclocked a Z-80.

Of course you could. Maybe someday you will. But you're not going to
do it by teaching your grandmother to suck eggs.

But then, the only one who can impress you seems to be you -- and
vice-versa.

You just need to develop some perspective. On a scale of 1 to 10, yet
another overclocked microprocessor is about a 0.1. There are scads of
them out there, any script kiddy can overclock one, and you haven't even
achieved an unusually high degree of overclock, so what makes your
achievement sufficiently unusual that it should impress someone?

 

[Skid]

I could continue to argue semantics with you for fun, but I'm losing
interest. However, as someone who has actually piloted an F-16, I have a
damn good idea what a roaring blur looks like.

When applying the term to an overclocked video card, it was quite obviously
intended as hyperbole.

When you start tossing in plums and egg-sucking grandmothers, the
conversation has gone too far downhill to reclaim.

My point all along has been that overclocking works for me by offering more
performance for less money than any off-the-shelf PC. I never did it to
impress anyone. In fact I stopped well short of what the card and cpu were
capable of because I insist on 100% stability in every available test,
benchmark, app and game.

The difference between us is not just that I overclock and you don't, it's
that I can see both sides to the argument and don't feel compelled to split
hairs challenging every adjective in someone else's post to feel superior.

Well, John, you are the ultimate authority on everything, including
the quantitative definition of "roaring blur."

If I'm driving along at 60 MPH and something passes me going 80 MPH,
it's clearly visible and unless it's got a busted exhaust it's not
roaring. Hence a 30% improvement is not "a roaring blur". Now if I'm
driving along at 60 MPH and an F15 goes over down on the deck in full
burner, it cannot be seen clearly and it is making a loud noise, hence
_that_ is a "roaring blur".

And you aren't getting anywhere near the performance difference
between a car at 60 MPH and an F15 in full burner.

Perhaps if you ever see a roaring blur yourself you'll understand why
you fell short of the mark.

And here I thought a
stable overclock of nearly a gigahertz was a good thing, and getting
the performance of a $400 video card for $159 was pretty sweet.

A plum is a good thing and pretty sweet. Do you find plums to be
impressive? And the fact that you have a good, pretty sweet thing does
not mean that you should put down others who don't find your good, sweet
thing quite to their taste.

Thanks for keeping me humble. I guess I could never impress a guy who
overclocked a Z-80.

Of course you could. Maybe someday you will. But you're not going to
do it by teaching your grandmother to suck eggs.

But then, the only one who can impress you seems to be you -- and
vice-versa.

You just need to develop some perspective. On a scale of 1 to 10, yet
another overclocked microprocessor is about a 0.1. There are scads of
them out there, any script kiddy can overclock one, and you haven't even
achieved an unusually high degree of overclock, so what makes your
achievement sufficiently unusual that it should impress someone?