[3line]

I'm just wondering here. I seriously can't imagine how overclocking would be all that effective if one is getting no more than 15fps normally in a game. Is it for the hard, material benefits of overclocking, or is it for the thrill of overclocking?

[millhouse]

Originally Posted by 3line

Is it for the hard, material benefits of overclocking, or is it for the thrill of overclocking?

both. Also, bragging rights. IMO

I personally wouldnt even buy a low-end card unless used as a temporary substitute. I prefer buying mid-range cards such as the x800xl that i will be getting soon and overclock it. But, overclocking any thing will always help.

[Know Nuttin]

it depends on if the video card is the bottleneck. If it is, then definitely overclock. If the processor is the bottleneck, then no reason to push the video card, as it still won't be getting any more data faster that it can crunch.

[Mr.Guvernment]

ii had a radone 9200 that did INSANE overclockin, i mena like 350 on the core type thing

i would think it helps, but the ram was only 64 bit so that was a limiting factor but there was an increase in FS / 3dmark scores etc.

[zip22]

i think thats the plan for a large portion of the overclocking crowd. buy cheap, and run it as fast as the much more expensive counterparts.

[Bios24]

If your only getting 15fps, that's an even bigger reason to overclock. Maybe you could get 20fps, or even 25fps from overclocking. Just because it's a low-end card doesn't mean you won't see any gains from overclocking. I gained an easy 5-6fps on Halo from overclocking my Ti4200.