Yes you have if you think i'm going to spend money on a cpu and the turn it down so it doesnt overheat....
~misfit~ said:Top posting fixed.
turn it down so it doesnt overheat....
Your money, your choice.
options in their bios 2nd even if they did all they would
years. There is absolutely no need for the average user to
running, stable machine. Can it be done? yes is what your
in the garage-90+f ambiant temps, stock cooler, filthy
Why do you have your PC in the garage? Mommy catch you masturbating in
front of the monitor one time too many?
I never claimed that everyone has these BIOS options. Anyone spec'ing
their own components can choose. I have presented yet another
possible reason to want these BIOS options, beyond just overclocking.
Even so, there are multiple other methods for adjusting voltage for
most any motherboard, just not as easily.
I certainly don't recommend that EVERYONE undervolt, only those
informed enough to make an intelligent decision, and still, it's a
decision. It is NOT the ultimate answer to anything, is only another
method to tweak a system, finely tune it, but also has real benefits
directly adressing one of the biggest problems facing Intel's high-end
and near-future desktop processors, that they create never-before-seen
amounts of heat, and more strain on other components like the power
supply.
Consider your PIII box... already 4 years running. A newer
motherboard built to the same price-point, grade of onboard
components, will not last as long, because the power usage went up...
a bit like burning two candles, but one with a longer wick so it burns
hotter, faster. A new system bought today should have enough
performance to be viable for even longer than the PIII did/does,
possibly a LOT longer,
except that it's lifespan isn't expected to
match, seems to be going DOWN compared to Coppermine boxes.
In the past year or so I've seen QUITE a few posts about dead/dying
semi-modern systems... a lot more than back in the PIII days, and at a
greater rate than these (now older) PIII systems are failing today,
which is backwards, the older systems should be failing more often
being nearer the end of their lifespan.
But for my P4 2.4 GHz why go to all that trouble of making a huge home
made passive cooler when I can achieve my requirements with a nice low
noise fan and undervolting?
Wrong. The need is based on the cost and weight of the passive
coolers compared to ease of undervolting along with a low noise fan.
J.Clarke said:And you would trust your life to "the standard of system tweakers and
overclockers world-wide"? Goody.
Can you say "shifting the burden of proof"?
JAD said:
options in their bios 2nd even if they did all they wouldJAD said:reality check....first your saying that everyone is going to have those
years. There is absolutely no need for the average user tohave to do is have an Intel chip, OEM cooler and the machine runs for 4
running, stable machine. Can it be done? yes is what yourhave to go through any of what your saying to have a long lasting, cool
in the garage-90+f ambiant temps, stock cooler, filthysaying true? most of it....the big question is WHY? I have abused My PIII
inside
4 years so far......
Wrong. Just because passive coolers were constructed for AMD CPU's in
the past doesn't mean that passive coolers can easily be created for
the newer, hotter Intels (or AMDs).
Of course they can--add a couple of more heat pipes, use both sides of
the case instead of just one, . . .
Exactly the point of using alternative cooling solutions.
Uh, custom built passive cooling devices _are_ "alternative cooling
solutions".
Wrong. Trying to sell it as something else does thousands of people a
service.
In what way?
That's why, for example, motherboard designers allow
features like "automatic overclocking". They wouldn't provide such
features unless it was providing many people a useful service.
Reading comprehension a bit lacking? Is is your contention that running
a CPU outside the manufacturer's specified operating range is a normal
procedure and that a reseller selling machines so constructed without
informing the purchaser is behaving ethically and that such machines are
to be trusted with mission-critical tasks?
Hint--"x does nobody a service" is a different statement from "claiming
thus and so about x does nobody a service".
reality check....first your saying that everyone is going to have those options in their bios 2nd even if they did all they would
have to do is have an Intel chip, OEM cooler and the machine runs for 4 years. There is absolutely no need for the average user to
have to go through any of what your saying to have a long lasting, cool running, stable machine. Can it be done? yes is what your
saying true? most of it....the big question is WHY? I have abused My PIII in the garage-90+f ambiant temps, stock cooler, filthy
inside
4 years so far......
Wrong. There is a growing perception of need for it. Evidence is
this discussion. Also see
http://www.bluecouch.com.au/reviews/nf7s/nf7s.asp or just Google for
"undervolt heat cpu".
And if I purchase a quiet fan and my system is still running on the
hot side of the specification, then rather than spending more money on
another cooling system (ie expensive water cooling system) I'll be
happy to see if undervolting can help.
Wrong. Plenty of non-engineers run their systems out of spec (ie
overclocking, overvolting) and they know what they are doing.
They
also know the consequences (ie shorter cpu life).
Wrong. Undervolting can allow a fan to run slower, which makes it
quieter.
It's like overclocking I guess--some people do it because they can.
With passive coolers available for every processor currently on the
market though there's no need to do it to achieve a quiet machine
though.
It's like overclocking I guess--some people do it because they can.
With passive coolers available for every processor currently on the
market though there's no need to do it to achieve a quiet machine
though.
Well, actually passive coolers have been constructed for AMD CPUs. And
since "everybody knows" that "Intel runs cooler" there should be no
problem doing the same for an Intel.
Not off-the-shelf items but it has
been done.
Running a CPU or any other component out of spec is something you get
away with, not correction of an error on the part of the designers.
Trying to sell it as anything else does nobody a service.
The primary reason that "people don't as often undervolt" is that there
is no percieved need for it.
I see. So the alternatives are to undervolt or to "sound like a leaf
blower"? Sorry, but now you're engaging in hyperbole. There are a
number of heat sinks on the market which can be used to cool any
processor currently in production using the quietest fans currently in
production, without operating the processor at a voltage level outside
the specified range.
Yes, it works fine if you _know_ _what_ _you_ _are_ _doing_, which means
that you are an electrical engineer with IC design experience,
an intimate familiarity with the particular device under
consideration, and you know what constitute the worst cases
that need to be tested to confirm reliable operation.
Undervolting the processor does not *make* the fan run slower.
If you have a cooler CPU, you can run the fan slower through a variety
of mechanisms.
Do you have a concrete example?
Well, actually, a quieter fan is the only alternative since no matter
how much you undervolt if you don't put in a quieter fan the noise level
doesn't change.