Notices

Overclockers Forums > Hardware > General Hardware
General Hardware Discuss your new build and gather upgrade suggestions. And if your question doesn't fit anywhere else...it goes here.
Forum Jump

How Overvolting Works, The Dangers of Overvolting, and "Safe" Overvolting Technique

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe Search this Thread
 
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-05-06, 11:49 PM   #41
lclark2074
Member

 
lclark2074's Avatar 

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Coventry Rhode Island

 
There is no problem running at 133 instead of 166 but remember that you are 600mhz slower than before you started! This will help you save processor life but thy last so long this is a mute issue

__________________
abit bx6r2 abit AI7
512 sd ram pc150 ddr1GB pc4200

celoron 600 oc 900 intel p4 2.8E
geforce fx 5200 AGP
Creative Labs Audigy2
overclocker seti team member
Avatar by Über~PhLuBB
lclark2074 is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 05-31-06, 03:00 PM   #42
Kemon
Member

 
Kemon's Avatar 

Join Date: May 2006

 
Very nice thread!! I was totally clueless as to what overclocking was, well aside from the fact it makes your computer faster, and now it makes total sense!! thanks alot!
Kemon is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 09-28-06, 07:34 PM   #43
Swatman
Member

 
Swatman's Avatar 

Join Date: Jan 2006

 
as soon as i get a good cooling system i will over clock w00t

__________________
||Current Computer||
||Case: Corsair Carbide Series 500R Black ||
||Processor: AMD FX-8350 Vishera 4.0GHz||
||Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD5||
||Graphics Card: XFX HD-695X-CNDC Radeon HD 6950 2GB 256-bit GDDR5||
||Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 600GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA ||
||Ram: CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (2 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1866 ||
HEAT
Swatman is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 01-01-07, 05:07 PM   #44
asusradeon
Member

 
asusradeon's Avatar 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: 127.0.0.1

 
awesome thanks m8
asusradeon is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 01-12-07, 06:31 AM   #45
T1Cybernetic
Member

 
T1Cybernetic's Avatar 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: West Yorkshire, Uk, Nr Earth

 
Wow my brain hurts after reading through this lot great post though +1 wisdom, There is alot here i did not know.

__________________
Empty your mind. Be formless, shapeless, like water.
Now you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup.
You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle.
You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Now, water can flow, or it can crash! Be water, my friend. (Bruce Lee)
T1Cybernetic is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 01-28-07, 12:00 AM   #46
Verse914
Member



Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Fort Wayne, IN

 
Great post! I always thought the opposite was true

Quote:
Overvolting does not increase overclocking potential by giving our hardware "more juice" or "more fuel".

__________________
E6600@3.6GHz w/ Coolit Freezone CPU cooler
ASUS P5W DH Deluxe
ATI x1950xtx
(2) 80GB Raptors in RAID0
OCZ ATI Crossfire 2GB DDR2 800
OCZ Game Xstream 700w
(2) Dell 20" LCDs 2007FP
Max Overclock: 4GHz (445x9)
Verse914 is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 03-11-07, 11:52 AM   #47
Peepaw
Member

 
Peepaw's Avatar 

Join Date: May 2005
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

 
Very nice write up.
Peepaw is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 05-12-08, 08:05 PM   #48
burningcpu
Mobo Cooking Member



Join Date: Jan 2008

 
Nice, thanks for writing it, Feliz.

__________________
Q6600 @ 3.6 Ghz 1.45V TRUE
2x2 GB @ 1066 Mhz GSkill 5-5-5-15 @ 1.9 V
Radeon 6870
Maximus Formula II

Q6600 @ 3.2 Ghz 1.35V AC freezer pro 7
4 GB Patriot 800 Mhz DDR2 5-5-5-16 1.92V
ATI x1950 256MB
D975xbx2
My heatware
burningcpu is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 06-01-08, 08:55 PM   #49
catgoesmoo
New Member

 
catgoesmoo's Avatar 

Join Date: May 2008

 
wow. cheers felinusz, excellent overview.
catgoesmoo is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 11-15-08, 12:37 AM   #50
RSDXzec
Disabled



Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Queensland, Australia

 
nice guide, thanx
RSDXzec is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 06-18-09, 01:19 AM   #51
ocping
New Member



Join Date: Jun 2009

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by felinusz View Post
When we increase our voltage high value (overvolting), we force the signal/voltage to reach a higher voltage high, but in the same amount of time as before. We stretch out the ‘range of motion’ (the difference between VSS and VCORE), but we leave the transition time alone. The result is that it takes considerably less time for the signal to switch from VSS to a VCORE that is within transistor tolerance – this accommodates our faster switching frequency, and keeps our overclocked signal switching frequency strong (stable) and within transistor tolerance.
Sorry for the thread necromancy, but isn't there something wrong with this explanation?

The above passage is claiming that with a higher VCORE ("When we increase our voltage high value", voltage high has been definied as VCORE), the signal takes less time to switch from VSS to VCORE.

From what I have gathered by reading through, VSS to VCORE has been analogized to be a distance, so if the distance is increased between VSS to VCORE how would a higher VCORE result in a lower time allowed for the runner to reach VCORE from VSS within tolerance since the time allowed for the transition to occur is said to remain the same ("we leave the transition time alone")?

The only way I see this working out is if he meant that increasing VCORE allows the T (period for VSS to VCORE) to be lowered, forcefully increasing the speed of the runner (frequency of processor).

Any clarification appreciated.

Last edited by ocping; 06-18-09 at 01:26 AM.
ocping is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 06-27-09, 02:15 AM   #52
pokeatthedevil
Registered

 
pokeatthedevil's Avatar 

Join Date: Jun 2009

 
Two quick question about this:
Is there any way to increase the tolerance(e.g. 5% to 10%)?
If so, what stability issues would that cause?

__________________
This sentence is not true.
pokeatthedevil is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 07-09-09, 01:58 PM   #53
felix45
New Member



Join Date: Jul 2009

 
thanks! I'll definitely be using this method!
felix45 is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 08-11-09, 03:10 PM Thread Starter   #54
felinusz
Senior Overclocking Magus

 
felinusz's Avatar 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Taiwan

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocping View Post
Sorry for the thread necromancy, but isn't there something wrong with this explanation?

The above passage is claiming that with a higher VCORE ("When we increase our voltage high value", voltage high has been definied as VCORE), the signal takes less time to switch from VSS to VCORE.
Despite changes to the voltage high value, the time it takes the signal to switch from low to high does not change.

Quote:
From what I have gathered by reading through, VSS to VCORE has been analogized to be a distance, so if the distance is increased between VSS to VCORE how would a higher VCORE result in a lower time allowed for the runner to reach VCORE from VSS within tolerance since the time allowed for the transition to occur is said to remain the same ("we leave the transition time alone")?
While the time that it takes for the signal to switch low to high remains the same, the signal is 'moving faster' than it was before the voltage high was increased.

Using the distance analogy, the runner is moving faster, at a greater meters per second rate than he was at a stock voltage high (or a stock 100 meter track). Running 110 metres in 10 seconds represents a faster transit than running 100 metres in 10 seconds, although the transit time is identical in both cases.


Quote:
The only way I see this working out is if he meant that increasing VCORE allows the T (period for VSS to VCORE) to be lowered, forcefully increasing the speed of the runner (frequency of processor).

Any clarification appreciated.

The 'speed' of the signal is increased by raising our voltage high, and this allows the signal to potentially reach transistor tolerance faster than it did at a stock voltage high. Remember though, that transistor tolerance and VCORE/voltage high are not one and the same; while the signal will switch low to high in the same amount of time as before, with an increased voltage high it will reach transistor tolerance faster.

felinusz is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 08-05-10, 05:21 PM   #55
rnldrc22
Member

 
rnldrc22's Avatar 

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dallas

 
really great guide, i'm more confident now on attempting the overclocking of my i7 thru overvolting, i'm going to be extra careful.

__________________
Case: HAF 922 with 3 fans
Mobo: P67A-GD65
CPU: I7 2600k @ 4.7 ghz 1.38v
CPU Cooler: Corsair H50 Cooler
Harddisk: OCZ Vertex 2 90gb / WD 500gb / Seagate 1tb
Video: SLI MSI Hawk GTX 460 918/2001 / MSI Cyclone GTX 460 OCd 908/2260
Memory: 16 gb of g.skills DDR3-1600mhz 8-8-6-19 1.65v
OS: Windows7 Pro x64
PSU:1000W Sparkle Power Supply
rnldrc22 is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 10-20-11, 10:05 AM   #56
devilDogbert

 
devilDogbert's Avatar 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: New Jersey

 
Second thread necro, apologies.

This thread uses figures determined to be optimal for 2005 hardware, has technology and manufacturing changed enough in the past 6 years to suggest an update?

__________________
AMD Phenom II x4 955 BE (kinda OC'ed to 3.5GHz)
XFX Radeon 6870 1GB 256-bit GDDR5
CM Hyper 212+ Evo HS
Asus M5A99X EVO Mobo
8Gb Ripjaws 1600 8-8-8-24
Antec High Current Gamer 520W PS
Win 7 Ult OEM x64 SP1
devilDogbert is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 11-07-11, 07:42 AM   #57
Theocnoob
Hates Trashcans
LOVES GRAMMER

 
Theocnoob's Avatar 

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Canada. Eh?

 
No need. ITs so simplified now. Do not exceed safe volts or heat, you're good
Theocnoob is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 12-19-11, 12:15 AM   #58
janas19
Member

 
janas19's Avatar 

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Hotlanta

 
AWESOMMMME. Thanks felinusz!


__________________
Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3L, ATi Radeon Sapphire 552MB, Antec Earthwatts EA-380D, Thermaltake Strike Mx case

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=486269
janas19 is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 12-21-12, 04:22 AM   #59
Haider
Registered



Join Date: Dec 2012

 
Impressive guide. Small question comes to mind I back in days of yore, I overclocked my Pentium 233 MHZ to 266 Mhz. In order to achieve that I ran vcore at a lower value than stock. I think it one increment lower on the motherboard. It was stable and produced less heat than when I was overclocked at stock vcore. What could account for that?
Haider is offline   QUOTE Thanks
Old 12-28-12, 10:28 AM   #60
Bobnova
Senior Member



 
Bobnova's Avatar 

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Humboldt

 
Voltage makes a much larger difference in power draw (and hence temperatures) than clocks do.

__________________
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." -- Einstein (maybe)

Thinking about an Asus motherboard? Think again.

How to check your PSU with a multimeter.

17bXw5t51rEBXGavJFMJsC8g7HQgThUGc7
Bobnova is offline Author Profile Benching Profile Folding Profile Heatware Profile Rosetta Profile   QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


Overclockers Forums > Hardware > General Hardware
General Hardware Discuss your new build and gather upgrade suggestions. And if your question doesn't fit anywhere else...it goes here.
Forum Jump

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Mobile Skin
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:03 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
You can add these icons by updating your profile information to include your Heatware ID, Benching Profile ID or your Folding/SETI profile ID. Edit your profile!
X

Welcome to Overclockers.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this the best community on the Internet since 1998!


(4 digit year)

Why Join Us?

  • Share experience
  • Max out your hardware
  • Best forum members anywhere
  • Customized forum experience

Already a member?