May be a brakethrough in overclocking for you

[Bucic]

It didn't occur to me right from the start so I guess others my be slow with this too ;)

 

What every pro recommends?

Overclock progressively and stress-test with a special program like CCCT or pi.

 

What you need to do if you need overclocking only for your DCS, ArmA etc.?

You overclock progressively and stress-test in DCS, ArmA etc.

 

Result:

You may be able to go from 3.5 GHz to 5.0 GHz instead of 4.3 GHz just like that!

 

Explanation:

Games suck at using capabilities of multi-core processors so they never stress the CPU anywhere near its limits.

 

More:

What's the point of synthetic 'heat virus' stress tests?http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/750455-What-s-the-point-of-synthetic-heat-virus-stress-tests

Edited May 9, 2015 by Bucic

[Kuky]

Not a recommended thing to do, because once your PC does have to do some high CPU utilization work, it'll start making errors, crashing, lock up etc. You want to avoid that. If you don't care about that, then by all means go ahead and overclock more.

[Bucic]

Not a recommended thing to do, because once your PC does have to do some high CPU utilization work, it'll start making errors, crashing, lock up etc. You want to avoid that. If you don't care about that, then by all means go ahead and overclock more.

That's exactly the assumption. Hell, if you run a video encoding software on such overclocked system with thermal management OFF in the BIOS you may even cook the CPU before it finishes. It's the adventurer's responsibility to play DCS and DCS only :)

[whitehot]

I brought my CPU from 3.2 ghz to 4 ghz, only using air cooling (a good Noctua fan) and I never had any problems whatsoever with games or video encoding etc.

When I performed the overclocking, I wasn't into liquid cooling. too many pumps, hoses and things which I didn't want to bother with.

But, with such a device, my 960 could well have gone at 4.4 ghz I believe.

And, I can say without any doubt, that particularly in DCS, there is a BIG difference in running at 4 ghz instead of 3.2 ghz.

Modern CPUs are very flexible in terms of overclocking. My suggestion is to read as more documents as you can before you start tinkering. In particular, find sources who describe the OC procedures for your specific CPU.

 

Remember that an effective OC isn't just a CPU thing, it involves several other components as well (Which means that the motherboard and the RAM are as much as important as the CPU: find models made for OC).

 

Do the job progressively, with small increments, especially if you aren't confortable with the settings, and then test the new settings thoroughly. If errors or crashes happen, something ain't right, go back to the bios setup and fine tune your parameters. Remember that "more ghz" need "more voltage", but also, that you aren't going to "cook up" components instantly (well ofc you aren't going to give 12v to a device made for 1.2v) - what cooks up chips today is high temperatures for long periods.

Know what your components max temps are, and decide a temp threshold you don't want to break - I would pick 80/85% of the declared value.

 

To test the OC, use prime number generators - they can stress the CPU quite easily. Also, a program called IntelBurnTest has been very useful for me.

Always check temperatures with one of the many utilities that do that - your reference value is the temperature at the cores, not the generic CPU temp.

[Bucic]

I brought my CPU from 3.2 ghz to 4 ghz, only using air cooling (a good Noctua fan) and I never had any problems whatsoever with games or video encoding etc.

When I performed the overclocking, I wasn't into liquid cooling. too many pumps, hoses and things which I didn't want to bother with.

But, with such a device, my 960 could well have gone at 4.4 ghz I believe.

And, I can say without any doubt, that particularly in DCS, there is a BIG difference in running at 4 ghz instead of 3.2 ghz.

Modern CPUs are very flexible in terms of overclocking. My suggestion is to read as more documents as you can before you start tinkering. In particular, find sources who describe the OC procedures for your specific CPU.

 

Remember that an effective OC isn't just a CPU thing, it involves several other components as well (Which means that the motherboard and the RAM are as much as important as the CPU: find models made for OC).

 

Do the job progressively, with small increments, especially if you aren't confortable with the settings, and then test the new settings thoroughly. If errors or crashes happen, something ain't right, go back to the bios setup and fine tune your parameters. Remember that "more ghz" need "more voltage", but also, that you aren't going to "cook up" components instantly (well ofc you aren't going to give 12v to a device made for 1.2v) - what cooks up chips today is high temperatures for long periods.

Know what your components max temps are, and decide a temp threshold you don't want to break - I would pick 80/85% of the declared value.

 

To test the OC, use prime number generators - they can stress the CPU quite easily. Also, a program called IntelBurnTest has been very useful for me.

Always check temperatures with one of the many utilities that do that - your reference value is the temperature at the cores, not the generic CPU temp.

This is pretty much an OT...

Here's what's on-topic

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/750455-What-s-the-point-of-synthetic-heat-virus-stress-tests

Edited May 9, 2015 by Bucic

[whitehot]

This is pretty much an OT...

Here's what's on-topic

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/750455-What-s-the-point-of-synthetic-heat-virus-stress-tests

 

sry, I must be seeing things because I thought I read somebody saying that OC isn't worth a try..

[Kuky]

It is not worth it if the CPU is not the bottle neck in the system (and most games are GPU limited), so in those cases it doesn't matter if you overclock the CPU.

[Wolf Rider]

Its only bragging rights anyway....

[BitMaster]

I UNDERCLOCK my CPU and GPU whenever I can, i.e. YouTube and any other ordinary work, it safes energy, safes my chips and is less noise usually ( not for me tbh ).

 

Before I switch on DCS I oc the CPU to rocksolid 4.8GHz and the GPU to 1500/8000 MHz, but only for as long as I need it.

 

Yes, it runs at 5GHz too, but wont run stable, wont finish prime95 and usually tilts in DCS too.

4.86GHz is the highest stable setting I was able to achieve and I see no point in pushing it to the very limit there is, 4.8GHz is fine for me. The CPU and GPU never get hotter than 44°C, with only 2 fans at 7Volts out of 4 12Volt 180mm fans....yes, I could chill it even more but it would also chill my legs and feet.... haha, 2 x 7Volt 180mm's is totally ok and cool enough, maybe during the hot summer days I switch on all 4 @ 12 Volts, or 9....

 

Bit

[GeorgeLKMT]

I UNDERCLOCK my CPU and GPU whenever I can, i.e. YouTube and any other ordinary work, it safes energy, safes my chips and is less noise usually ( not for me tbh ).

 

Why? Both CPU and graphics card has energy saving states and lowers its frequencies and voltages automatically according to load.

Edited May 12, 2015 by GeorgeLKMT

[Tello]

I see all them numbers in benchmark go up and that is good for that. But I do not feel any difference or get a better experience inside the games when OC my CPU.

 

Buying a SSD some years back was the biggest jump I have seen in performance.

 

But I was thinking about getting a new and bigger monitor to improve my SA :P

[SkateZilla]

I overclock my own way, which is the old way.

 

If all cores wont pass prime95 stable, then the cpu isnt stable.

 

Even if you only want to use 2 cores, the system is still gonna try and use all of then for everything else.

 

Once one core fails, you'll get a halt state screen

[Bucic]

I see all them numbers in benchmark go up and that is good for that. But I do not feel any difference or get a better experience inside the games when OC my CPU.

 

Buying a SSD some years back was the biggest jump I have seen in performance.

 

But I was thinking about getting a new and bigger monitor to improve my SA :P

Try testing the effects of CPU OC on low graphics setting to eliminate bottlenecking by the GPU.

 

I overclock my own way, which is the old way.

 

If all cores wont pass prime95 stable, then the cpu isnt stable.

 

Even if you only want to use 2 cores, the system is still gonna try and use all of then for everything else.

 

Once one core fails, you'll get a halt state screen

Which is not true*. But hey, having own way is important ;)

 

* Or to put it differently, my method still works because system puts little load on the cores. P95 establishes such unrealistic conditions that even a defrag job running concurrently to my gameplay won't crash my config.

 

Here are the results of my OC in ArmA 3. If I tested the config with p95 I would not get past 4.3 GHz probably.

AMD FX-6300

Edited May 13, 2015 by Bucic