Overclocking....still wary of attempting it....

[Alan_A]

No problem...Chief has never done this before so I only gave two quick options. I test computer equipment for mfgs through TechCorp. I do this for a living and OCing is very easy on the i5 and i7 Core systems. I have a complete guide that I wrote back in the 775 socket days that has been updated to today's standard or just use Maximum PC magazine's guide at maximumpc.com
Ted

Thanks, and your advice to Chief makes perfect sense.

If I'd kept to my original plan, my first overclock would have been a 775, and I would have come across your guide that way. But the i7's were just coming out and I decided to take the leap. I believe you that they're much easier to work with.

I'm really surprised at the performance I've been able to get out of the 980. I could never get the 965 stable at 4 and had to back it off to 3.875. I think better cooling has something to do with it - I switched from a Silverstone case to a better ventilated Coolermaster 932, and replaced a Thermalright 120 Extreme heatsink with a better designed Thermalright Silver Arrow. But my guess is that the bigger margin of difference comes from the chip itself. The 965 ran hot and I probably got one that didn't clock well. The 980 is a couple of generations ahead and runs much cooler, so there's more overhead to work with. Makes for a very nice experience. I'll be happier, though, when i know it's completely stable. Testing continues...

[Alan_A]

One thing to keep in mind about overclocking, is that you only gain a tiny fraction of speed, while risking a significant monetary investment.

3.6 to 4.2 only yields +15% processor speed. And upping your CPU speed by 15% may not be a significant factor in FSX. You may have problems with memory, hard-drive speed, motherboard chip sets, or your graphics card might be lagging. Sometimes the combination of scenery and aircraft will just plain give you 12 FPS, and that won't budge until you push the sliders to the left.

I wouldn't do it.

Dick

That can be true. Of course, the 15 percent difference can allow one or two notches of autogen, or much smoother performance at an existing setting. To me, FSX overclocking is partly a matter of the numbers and partly a matter of the overall impression. A little additional smoothness goes a long way.

The latest chips seem to be much easier to work with - there are good safeguards and fewer settings to get critically wrong. Of course, it helps to be an expert, like Ted or Nick... or if you're not, to be like me, and do everything Ted or Nick tell you to do... I've done fine so far. Just trying not to step off the path...

[txnetcop]

One thing to keep in mind about overclocking, is that you only gain a tiny fraction of speed, while risking a significant monetary investment.

3.6 to 4.2 only yields +15% processor speed. And upping your CPU speed by 15% may not be a significant factor in FSX. You may have problems with memory, hard-drive speed, motherboard chip sets, or your graphics card might be lagging. Sometimes the combination of scenery and aircraft will just plain give you 12 FPS, and that won't budge until you push the sliders to the left.

I wouldn't do it.

Dick

Dick your argument against overclocking is very understandable...but since the socket 775 days Intel has put safeguards into the motherboards and CPUs to help minimize that very danger. All of the newer motherboards from AMD and Intel now include these safety freatures like auto shut down, boot loop and other schemes to keep one from ruining their investment. The real danger to parts is heat generated by raised voltage, so if you use a the heat spreaders for memory, the aftermarket cooling products for your CPU and video card your chances of doing any real damage is minimal at best. I had been running a Q9550 on a Gigabyte X48 DQ6 board at 4.0Ghz on air for over two years and it runs just as good today as it did when I first did the overclock. The guy I sold it to is still praising the way it handles all the new games. I tested the entire system every six months to ensure that it put out the power it stipulates. By the way that is over 30% on my overclock and I run FSX extremely well as many in here can attest that I have built for. My i7 at the office has been running at 4.4Ghz for 7 months and has never exceeded 72C running full tilt...well within the Intel guidelines.
Ted

[stansdds]

I overclocked my E6850 from 3.0GHz to 3.6GHz. I was able to pick up a few fps, but the bigger benefit was a more stable fps and a smoother simulation. FSX needs a fairly good video card, but it really needs a fast multi-core CPU.

[Alan_A]

Sorry... am coming late to this thread because I've been caught up in rebuilding my FSX system around an overclocked i7 980x.

All I can say is it was unbelievably easy. Overclocking a 965 was a struggle by comparison. I don't claim, by the way, to be a very skillful or experienced overclocker.

I don't mean to step on Ted's advice. There are many different ways to clock this animal and I'm sure most of them will produce good results. For what it's worth, I followed THIS GUIDE to the letter. It overlaps with Ted's guide on many points, as it should, but there are some differences, too. It includes full settings for an ASUS BIOS and links to freeware tools. Thanks to this set of instructions, I had the system running at 4.48 MHz on air and on surprisingly low voltage (1.3375,though if things get unstable later I'll go to 1.35) inside of about an hour and a half.

So if you'd like, give it a try. If you're already set up, that's even better.

Ted - hope you don't mind this. I haven't seen your guides before but will definitely want to spend some time with them. You can't know too much about this stuff.

Enjoy!

Quick update for anyone who wants to follow the advice in the linked thread - although my system passed its tests at CPUv 1.3375, I ran into some minor stability problems in FSX, so I'm now up to 1.35. Temperatures are still astonishing low - the 980 is a dream to overclock. Still a tricky business, but not a very risky one. Enjoy!

[Bjoern]

To everyone trying to overclock, this is a great tool to test system stability and temperatures:

http://www.ocbase.com/perestroika_en/

If your system survives the one hour automatic test, you're good to go. If your system survives an hour of Linpack, you're even better off. If you can run an infinite standard test for over two hours, you won't have to worry and if you survive more than two hours of Linpack you're absolutely safe.

Nothing will get damaged in the process. If the CPU gets hotter than 80°C, the test will shut down.

...back in the 775 socket days...

Makes S775 systems sound really old.

All of the newer motherboards from AMD and Intel now include these safety freatures like auto shut down, boot loop and other schemes to keep one from ruining their investment.

I think they've been there before. Could be that they were refined ever since, but a thermal shutdown and throttling exists at least since the Core2x.

I had been running a Q9550 on a Gigabyte X48 DQ6 board at 4.0Ghz on air for over two years and it runs just as good today as it did when I first did the overclock.

My Q9450 still runs great after more than 2 years. Got upped from 3.2 to 3.5 GHz this weekend, thanks to the great X48T. :d

Sadly, 3.6 GHz will be the end of the line. I'd have to fry the North Bridge for more than FSB450.

Apart from that, I doubt I could have my RAM timings in any sweeter spot than this one...876 MHz, T(RD) at 6 and 7-8-7-24 timings.

Still drooling...