How much higher could you overclock your CPU on water?

[thorilan]

ive seen in my own systems a difference of 520-580 over air cooling .

i like this poll because while its a little inderect it cuts to the heart of whats important in watercoolling.

all to many people measure success by their water temps. i measure it by max stable OC.

for instance i may be able to get a slightly lower temp with a certain waterblock but then with another one i might get around the same temps but a higher OC because the block handles the load in a more even fasion. this is really noticeable when going from say a white water to a cathar silver cascade ( something i have tested a bit on with a very good OCing board and proc)

 

[BLcK]

I got a 200Mhz increase from 3.4 to 3.6 and i didnt notice any sort of real performance gain although it seemed to help my frames by a couple of frame increase while i was pplaying fear nothing else really. Im not sure if OC'in had anything to do with my mobo getting its usb shot so im going to stick with stock and use my WC rig for the noise and vid card OC since that doesnt really affect the rig by a huge margin.

 

[Dfi-Boy]

whos the guy that gets 1000MHz-1200MHz more on just water?

 

[BLcK]

whos the guy that gets 1000MHz-1200MHz more on just water?

Blackmage

just click the numbers:
http://www.ocforums.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=610

 

[MoreGooder]

I have an old P4 2.4GHz, running 3.3Ghz thanks to water cooling and 275MHz front side bus.

 

[Revivalist]

whos the guy that gets 1000MHz-1200MHz more on just water?

Wow! . . . And I was thinking that we should delete that option. . . .

Nice overclock, Blackimage!

By the way, I hope people are keeping in mind that this is supposed to be a poll of how much more you can overclock your CPU beyond what you were already overclocking on air. That is the only way to determine the benefit of being on water rather than air.

So for example, my chip is stock at 2.2GHz. On air I reached 2.6GHz. But on water I reached 2.7GHz. So I voted "50-100MHz" because I only reached 100MHz more on water. . .

Also, if it's still possible, I hope a moderator would change the options so that they don't overlap. (That was a mistake I made.) I think they should be. . .

No additional overclock
Less than 50MHz more
50-100MHz more
101-200MHz more
201-400MHz more
401-600MHz more
601-800MHz more
801-1000MHz more
1001MHz-1200MHz more
Over 1200MHz more

 

[MasterCraft]

somehow I doubt anyone got an ADDITIONAL 1000-1200 mhz off water..

that's in the range of rediculous

 

[MoreGooder]

somehow I doubt anyone got an ADDITIONAL 1000-1200 mhz off water..

that's in the range of rediculous

Perhaps prior to water cooling the old stock Intel HSF was poorly installed. I just remember having games crash on me with the stock HSF if I ran at anything higher than 230 FSB, and that's even after changing from PC3200 to PC3700 (DDR 466) ram. I discovered using Motherboard Monitor that the game crashes occurred only when the processor reached some crazy high temp (can't remember what it was). Same processor, same memory ran at 240 FSB for a 2.88 GHz CPU clock speed when on water cooling, but memory was holding me back from going to an even higher FSB. Now I have OCZ PC4400 (DDR550) memory I can get the same processor to 3.33Hz, and again, I believe the limiting factor is my PC4400 memory. That's an increase of the max stable FSB difference, water vs air, of 19.5%! But ultimately, I don't know if the HSF was poorly installed or not. That could have been a reason for the crappy overclock initially.

As I recall, I used a 5:4 asynchronous clock setting to investigate the true speed limit of this P4 2.4C, and I believe it was 3.53GHz before windows wouldn't boot. However, that was with asynchronous memory with the old PC3700 RAM I had, so I really don't know if this is a true measure of the max overclockl. The 2.4C's were known during their hay day to be super overclocking processors.

 

[orion456]

Besides adding water CPU cooling what OTHER cooling have you added:

1. chip set HS

2. memory/northbridge/chip set fans

3. large fan blowing down over the CPU and surrounding area

4. water to GPU

5. exhaust/intake ducts/fans

6. reduced CPU voltage

And which things above worked/failed to add to your OC?

 

[kswaid]

I only gained about 100mhz on CPU, but the videocard was a different story. With stock air cooling max clocks were 570/550 and load temps around 60C-70C. With watercooling and some voltage I can now clock to 669/610 and have load temps around 40C.

 

[hibner]

I'm sayin' 200-400mhz. I've got a crap case with horrid air flow. So I would think that water could help me alot. How about someone gimme their water setup for a whlie so I can see? I think anything more than 500mhz increase from switching to water is insane. I think you need to start another poll called "How much higher have you overclocked your CPU on water?" just for comparison.

 

[Revivalist]

I'm sayin' 200-400mhz. I've got a crap case with horrid air flow. So I would think that water could help me alot. How about someone gimme their water setup for a whlie so I can see? I think anything more than 500mhz increase from switching to water is insane. I think you need to start another poll called "How much higher have you overclock your CPU on water?" just for comparison.

That is the name of the poll.

I think it would be better to have votes from people's actual results rather than what they expect they would be able to do if they did had a water-cooling setup. (Please don't take any offense Hibner. Like I said, I just think it would make the poll more factual.)

 

[hibner]

That is the name of the poll.

No, not how much could you overclock, but how much have you overclocked. In other words a poll showing results for people who have already changed from air to water. ...no offence taken

 

[Revivalist]

No, not how much could you overclock, but how much have you overclocked. In other words a poll showing results for people who have already changed from air to water. ...no offence taken

Yes, that's what it's supposed to be. I hope nobody got confused by the phrasing of the title. It's supposed to be a poll of people's actual results, not their speculation.