• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

4.7 Ghz vs 5 Ghz

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

martinhal

Registered
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Other than benchmarks would I notice the difference between 4,7Ghz and 5 Ghz. The reason I ask is that my chip can do 5Ghz but it gets a bit hot and I would have to invest in better cooling.
 
Not really, most games are more GPU limited once they get past a CPU bottleneck. In day-to-day use you likely wouldn't see any noticeable difference either. If you are stable and happy with your settings at 4.7 I wouldn't risk heating up the CPU and investing in more cooling to run at 5.0.


If you are looking to spend any money at all to see a noticeable difference in day-to-day use a SSD (solid state drive) would be the way to go
 
Already got the SSD thing done. Guess I will save my money. The extra 300 mhz would only be braging rights:attn:
 
I wouldn't worry about it, that's a pretty small difference all things considered. Better to spare your CPU the abuse and run at 4.7 IMO.
 
After researching the pros and cons of a clock near 5 Ghz I have decided to leave my clock at 4.5 GHz to keep my voltage around 1.3. I doubt my current build will ever see anything significantly higher than it's current clock.
 
by around 1.3 do you mean 1.35? I would run every test imaginable before calling it stable at 1.3

My 2500K could boot and prime blend with error checking at 1.3, but both superpi32M and 3dVantage killed it needed 1.35.
 
I'm sorry, mine shows 1.304 to 1.312 to be exact under full load. I've ran several tests in IBT with maximum settings and had no issues, then roughly 12 hours of Prime with the blend setting. So far so good. I did however get the BOSD when I tried running at ~1.284, and IBT failures at 1.296, bumped it back up and everything has been stable ever since. It's been over nearly two months on it's current voltage.

Thanks Neuromancer, I'll have to look into superpi32M and 3dVantage to make sure everything is for sure stable.
 
Last edited:
I don't want to start a new thread because my question is pretty relevant to this. I'm running an intel i5 2500k @ 4.2 Ghz and 1.25V. I ran prime95 blend mode for 3 hours and intel burn test for 1 hour at max settings. The highest temp. I got was 63C, does this seem like a stable system? I've been running this for about a month now without any problems
 
I don't want to start a new thread because my question is pretty relevant to this. I'm running an intel i5 2500k @ 4.2 Ghz and 1.25V. I ran prime95 blend mode for 3 hours and intel burn test for 1 hour at max settings. The highest temp. I got was 63C, does this seem like a stable system? I've been running this for about a month now without any problems

Yes it does. Go for a 12hours prime run and you'll be sure!
 
Yes it does. Go for a 12hours prime run and you'll be sure!

Okay, I'll do that one weekend when I don't have much to do.

It just makes me wonder why other people have such high voltages (1.30-1.40V) when their overclocks are similar to mine. What are the consequences of having a lower than needed voltage?
 
The lower the better: the heat load is lower, and too much voltage would kill the chip.
They are all different. Some do [email protected], some @1.55, and some don't!
1.25v sounds about the average for 4.2GHz.
 
Since I killed my i7 860 at 4.9 GHz, I have resigned from running at the highest speed I can reach. :/
 
Back