Do you overclock for Performance or MHZ?

[Mortdog]

When I read all these posts about getting higher and higher most of them are reach by a bus under 133 mhz in consideration of the stability.

Well. If some wants performance that is not a very good choice is it?

Lets say one manage to overclock his 1000 mhz by 10 x 133 =1333 mhz

This dude can also overclock it by a multiplier of 8.5 x 150 =1275 mhz

Most of the people I see around in the forums would choose the first alternative.

He would probably get higher scores in benchmarking programs like sisoft sandra in cpu benchmark but in real life perfomance he would gain from alternative 2.

The struggle for reaching higher clock speeds is pretty weird.

As for me. I could choose to overclock my 1 ghz to 1470 ( 9.5 x 155) or 1450 (9 x 161).

Ofcourse I choose 1450 mhz because of the memory bandwith.

What I have heard the bottleneck often is the memory bandwith.
This dilemma affects both the gpu and the cpu...

[TranceBear]

I go for the performance especialy since I have installed WinXP RC-2. I also burn DVD's and I need all the performance I can get out of this little 1 gigger.

[Fiz]

I overclock because I think its fun, I get a kicvk out of seeing how high I can make my machine go. Nothing I do really requires all of these MHZ, but it's nice to have them.

Fiz

[Colin]

Performance. Going for MHz is a juvenile ego trip.

[!-=sky=-!]

i m going for speed as i need to "push" my geforce256 to the max with the cpu.....this card is horrible at doing anything (around 20 fps @1024x768 in counter strike)

[aeon]

Performance is an easy winner. I'd much rather have a system running @ 10x150 for 1.5ghz, than 11.5x133 for 1.53ghz... your system would just run much faster. More MHZ isn't always the best thing, especially when a large FSB boost will up any Geforce series card's performance significantly.

[chawken]

Originally posted by Mortdog
When I read all these posts about getting higher and higher most of them are reach by a bus under 133 mhz in consideration of the stability.

Well. If some wants performance that is not a very good choice is it?

Lets say one manage to overclock his 1000 mhz by 10 x 133 =1333 mhz

This dude can also overclock it by a multiplier of 8.5 x 150 =1275 mhz

Most of the people I see around in the forums would choose the first alternative.

He would probably get higher scores in benchmarking programs like sisoft sandra in cpu benchmark but in real life perfomance he would gain from alternative 2.

The struggle for reaching higher clock speeds is pretty weird.

As for me. I could choose to overclock my 1 ghz to 1470 ( 9.5 x 155) or 1450 (9 x 161).

Ofcourse I choose 1450 mhz because of the memory bandwith.

What I have heard the bottleneck often is the memory bandwith.
This dilemma affects both the gpu and the cpu...

It's all about the numbers. Most people who buy PC's are not PC literate - and know nothing about bandwidth. All they want to know is how fast is the Processor.

Being a Seti@Home cruncher - I can see the benefits of overclocking via fsb adjustments vs. multiplier adjustments. Yeah you will see some improvements by bumping that multiplier up .5, but you see more dramatic improvements if you just raise the fsb up 4mhz. All of my rigs run at the CPU's default multiplier and I crank the fsb up as far as my memory will allow. Much better performance.

[KaHNZa]

I go for performance. Right now I'm running 145x10. But later I may try for something like 9.5x153 to get some more performance. That is if my Micron pc133 memory can handle it! :)

[JaY_III]

performance all the way.
and it is funny when you slower machine beats theh crap out of some system wih higher numbers

[UnseenMenace]

Originally posted by Fiz (The Ringmaster)
I overclock because I think its fun, I get a kicvk out of seeing how high I can make my machine go. Nothing I do really requires all of these MHZ, but it's nice to have them.

Fiz

Exactly my thoughts, its the challenge and fun that drives me not the speed increase

[The Coolest]

I mostly try to get the performance up. Though I don't want to o/c my comps till I get better cooling (Mini super orb on AMD 1.2 and a stock HSF on AMD K6-III 400).

[kentank]

for me ...
i overclock to get cheaper rig..

buy the cheap thing with the good
quality.... than push to the end
of the limitation...

perfomance.... what is perfomance..??

since i was using this for typing and
little gaming..... :D

i have many perfomance if i have much money..

the others thing it's fun ....

[Hoot]

I saw this somewhere, but can't remember where.

I Overclock, therfore I Amd. :D

If you're honest with yourself. Considering the costs of enhanced cooling, enhanced PSU stability, enhanced RAM, etc, Overclocking is certainly not a means to save money.

Hoot

[William]

why not do both?

[eobard]

Originally posted by Hoot
I saw this somewhere, but can't remember where.

I Overclock, therfore I Amd. :D

Hoot




:D!

[M@€$†®Ö™]

Originally posted by Colin
Performance. Going for MHz is a juvenile ego trip.

One encompasses the other how is that juvenile ? Or should I say one is the by product of the other.

Maestro