Computer Build Resource Thread - Page 177

On March 14 2011 06:51 skyR wrote:
@Talz

The core i5 2500 is currently the fastest processor on the market atm in the $200 range. The only processors that beat it in performance would be the core i7 2600 @ $300 and the core i7 990x @ $1000.

You can easily overclock the core i5 2500k to 5GHz. Most games aren't coded to use more than 2 cores so yes it is sort of a marketing ploy for those gamers who are less knowledgeable. There are a few games that take advantage of more than two cores such as BFBC2.

You'll be able to play SC2 on Ultra and quite possibly D3 on Ultra without a hitch using that setup. I personally have a i5 2500 and gtx 460. SC2 runs at 100 - 200 FPS at the start of game (depending if its 1v1 or 4v4) and the only time I notice slowdown is when a mothership comes into play with 400+ things on the screen.

On March 14 2011 11:04 Womwomwom wrote:
Shit like i7 990x are just halo products. They make no money whatsoever but they're there to prove that company X has the best of the best.

No there isn't any reason to get these products. In rare cases it could be useful like if you really love Microsoft Flight Simulator but otherwise no there isn't much reason to bother with them.


The risk is in the voltages, to get those frequencies you need to bump up voltages to ensure stability which decreases the life span of the processor. No, you don't need water cooling to keep something similar to that stable actually these days there isn't much practical reason to water cool when air coolers are so effective at what they do.

Of course the decrease in life span isn't that much, all computer parts are pretty much overengineered. I've still got overclocked Pentium 4s still running like new and they're like 10 years old; back then you had to be careful of what you do because the motherboard wasn't as good at protecting the processor but now a good motherboard will pretty much take care of the computer for you.

The reason they're clocked at a conservative amount is because of the binning process. Not all processors are created equal and thus some processors will overclock better than others...conservative clocks ensure that ALL processors will work rock solid. That and everyone is employing "overclocking" through some sort of overclock-when-in-demand feature into their processors to improve idle power efficiency.

On March 14 2011 15:11 Myrmidon wrote:


All processors of a certain model (and revision aka stepping) should be manufactured to be identical. In the least, they have the same circuit design. However, random impurities in the silicon and the non-exactness of the manufacturing process may make some CPUs completely defective. They actually need to be thrown away.

Some samples will have small defects that just cause higher leakage current or something along those lines. Thus, some CPUs will just physically (electrically) be able to operate without error at higher frequencies and lower voltages. Those samples would be said to overclock better.

A short picture demonstration of the manufacturing process:
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/chipmaking/index.htm

As mentioned by Womwomwom, Intel and AMD sell CPUs configured such that with very high probability, each sample (even the worst ones) should work stably and properly, even on a poor motherboard given power by a poor power supply. If you're overclocking, you are pushing your particular sample closer to its limit. With increased frequencies and voltages to support them, you're going to draw more power and create more heat than the stock cooling solution (which should fit in even the smallest cases) can handle. This is why you use an aftermarket heatsink that can handle the increased heat dissipation requirements.