What is the point of CPU modification for you??

[planet436]

You can increase the Turbo slightly on some H55 boards (can't find a link to this) along with a very slight BCKL increase for non-K editions.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=264192

What is great about SB is you are looking to get a new CPU/MB now is that with a 2500k and cheap P67 board (currently ~100 on entry level MSI and Gigabyte boards) it might be more expensive than an X6 + board but for gamers, the advice amongst most the reviews so far is this is a better option now than a similar AMD setup.

It looks like you can OC higher, the chip runs cooler, uses a lot less power and gets you better performance. Whether this is worth the extra cost over an AMD setup is up to the individual of course, depends on your budget and expectations.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Maybe I need to add a compulsive tinkerer option too!

[vrykyl]

For me its all about 'free' additional performance, saving money over more expensive chips and going that little bit longer between upgrades...

For eg, my Q6600 is overclocked to a level that at the time (if I didnt overclock) would have cost £800+ (in terms of clocks speeds / performance) for a similar chip. It also means that 3-4 years on im still using the same system and it still does everything I ask of it

[jim]

I think the main thing for my with my Q9450 was the time involved. It was literally change setting --> 24 hrs bench in P95. Rinse and repeat until I got a higher enough and a stable clock.

As for the damage part I've been quite lucky. My first OC, and no damage done at all.

I don't think I've ever damaged anything by OCing to be fair. I've broken a hell of a lot of stuff, but I don't think it was ever my fault.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I don't think I've ever damaged anything by OCing to be fair. I've broken a hell of a lot of stuff, but I don't think it was ever my fault.

The only time I have damaged anything is when I was being a numpty!

I remember nearly destroying my HD3870 by dropping a heatsink on it!

[Terbinator]

I think most components have over-heat protection on them anyway which is everyones worst enemy when overclocking.

[Saracen]

For me its all about 'free' additional performance, saving money over more expensive chips and going that little bit longer between upgrades...

For eg, my Q6600 is overclocked to a level that at the time (if I didnt overclock) would have cost £800+ (in terms of clocks speeds / performance) for a similar chip. It also means that 3-4 years on im still using the same system and it still does everything I ask of it

For me, the crunch is in there, albeit a bit obliquely.

And that crunch, for me, is .... will the over-clocked system do something I need to do, or at a performance level I need that isn't available at stock speed? If it does, then I'd look at what the cost difference would be to buy a chip that does it at rated speed. If that delta is too big, I'd clock it. But if it's a nominal cost, then I'd just buy the chip I really needed, and if it's a bit more expensive, then, oh well.

In other words, it's a balance between the extra cost of a chip, and the extra capability of the PC.

My current 'main' machine is a decent spec (as in a 3Ghz+ Quad), but it's hardly state of the art and isn't certainly nothing to brag about in the e-peen stakes. It does, however, do everything I throw at it sufficiently well that I can't see the need for extra performance, and the "everything" includes some hefty Photoshop files, and voice recognition for dictation.

So .... have I clocked it? A bit, yeah. If I can turn it up, using the existing cooler, and can do it with a simple BIOS (or clocking prog) change, and can do it with no extra cost, minimal time doing it and NO sacrifice in system stability, especially on demanding tasks, then why not? But if it requires extra expenditure, or faffing about with voltages or liquid cooling, then I can't be bothered, and I'm certainly not about to risk system stability.

This is, of course, a personal solution. For me, I have no interest in getting maximum performance for performance's sake, no interest in benchmarking to see if this setting is a smidgeon faster than that one, because it'll make no real world difference whatever to what I use the machine for. But, for other people, if tweaking or heroic cooling is either a hobby in itself, or gives then PC capabilities they need and can't afford any other way, then fair enough. It just doesn't interest me.

In the early days of clocking, the performance benefit could be significant, not as measured by benchmarks but in real world capabilities, and the CPU cost difference to do it without clocking could be huge. Then, there was a real world benefit and like most of us, I've done my share of voltage tweaking, heatsink lapping, and cutting/making of processor bridges. I've still got some manually unlocked Athlon XPs running.

But these days, for MY purposes and values, I just don't see the point in it.

[DanceswithUnix]

Maybe I need to add a compulsive tinkerer option too!

That would be the heart of it for me, though with my current rig I bought a 955BE always with the intention of overclocking to a mild degree. I use it to benchmark software I write, so ability to change clock speed and core count does actually get used. The fact that I can clock it up a bit to track CPUs that were not released when I bought it is a bonus, it has been underclocked as well.

I aught to try a decent overclock if only for kicks. I have the motherboard & heatsink for it, I just don't want the machine to get too noisy.

Edit to add: Just changing multiplier is good too as it simulates other CPUs by leaving memory speeds unmolested. Changing bus speed wouldn't represent any other platform.

[Terbinator]

Can you still change the QPI/VTT ratios on the SB 'K' chips?

[kalniel]

Can you still change the QPI/VTT ratios on the SB 'K' chips?

Is that what you mean? QPI/VTT is a voltage setting, I don't think it's something you'd usually have a ratio for.

There's not much point having it adjustable, given the fixed CPU clock. I don't think higher memory multipliers would need additional voltage of the controller, but if they did, it'd only apply to 2600 chips.

[Terbinator]

I just know its a changeable ratio on my board. I can have either x16/x18 for QPI/VTT so i thought it was basically the un-core and so the cache etc ?

[Uriel]

It's all about getting the best bang for the lowest buck. Currently using a £36 athlon X2 5000+ unlocked to Phenom II X4 and clocked to 3.1 to 3.3 GHz.

Just got a 5200+ to see if I can get the same thing but a bit faster with DDR3 support.

[Homeking]

It's all about getting the best bang for the lowest buck. Currently using a £36 athlon X2 5000+ unlocked to Phenom II X4 and clocked to 3.1 to 3.3 GHz.

Forgive my ignorance as I'm new to the whole concept of unlocking cores but is it really possible to turn an Athlon x2 into a Phenom II x4?

I thought the lack of L3 cache would stop it being a Phenom II but like I say I'm very new to this concept.

[scaryjim]

... is it really possible to turn an Athlon x2 into a Phenom II x4?

Not generally. The 45nm, AM2+, X2 5000+ was a special case: it was made from binned Phenom II dies with 2 cores and the cache disabled, and clocked at 2.3GHz. However, with ACC active some of them unlocked to full Phenom IIs with 4 cores and 6MB L3 cache.

The same applies to Athlon IIs, incidentally: some are made from Athlon II dies which don't have any L3 cache to begin with, but some are made from Phenom II dies and can be unlocked. What you get in the box is a bit of a lottery, tbh.

[Max Tractor]

Just got a 5200+ to see if I can get the same thing but a bit faster with DDR3 support.

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/amd-a...-cache-65w-oem

This the cpu you are on about, I have been keeping an eye on this cpu and the thread over at xs, some conflicting reports of lock/unlock

cheers

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

There is one version of the X2 220 which you chaps should read about!