PDA

View Full Version : overclocking vs faster CPU



nerdy_kid
March 5th, 2010, 02:11 AM
was wondering if overclocking my laptop to say...2.4Ghz would generate more heat then if i bought a 2.4Ghz CPU.

thanks :)

NovaAesa
March 5th, 2010, 02:59 AM
try it and find out?

solitaire
March 5th, 2010, 03:01 AM
if it's the 1.4Ghz in your Sig then you'll only have about 10 seconds of usable time on the laptop before the CPU cooks and you've got a smoking paperweight of a laptop.

At most you'll get the CPU up to 1.8 (even then the heat will cause erors and thermal cutouts.)
If you can swap out the CPU then it might be worth doing that! (you'll have to change the heatsink as well)
Otherwise If you want a faster laptop, get a new laptop :D

Meep3D
March 5th, 2010, 03:37 AM
CPU's are generally made in batches and are allocated speeds based upon the quality of the final product - the ones that are simply not capable of a fast speed without errors are sold for less.

Every now and then they do a 'die shrink' and make it smaller - less size = less electricity = less heat. With decent cooling (unlikely in a laptop) you can get more out of a CPU than you are meant to due to margins of error.

But don't do it. The sacrifice in stability is never worth the gains in speed. If you really want a faster CPU buy one - but bear in mind that the bottleneck in a modern system is rarely the CPU anymore. More RAM or an SSD drive will commonly provide more value.

nmccrina
March 5th, 2010, 03:42 AM
On a slightly related note, does anyone ever underclock their CPU's? Is that even possible? If you had this really powerful CPU but didn't do much beside the standard web browsing/word processing thing (and didn't feel like helping to search for aliens), mightn't clock-cycles-for-lower-temperatures be a good tradeoff?

NightwishFan
March 5th, 2010, 03:48 AM
On a slightly related note, does anyone ever underclock their CPU's? Is that even possible? If you had this really powerful CPU but didn't do much beside the standard web browsing/word processing thing (and didn't feel like helping to search for aliens), mightn't clock-cycles-for-lower-temperatures be a good tradeoff?

I would think it not worth the trouble. If you run ondemand, then it will use less frequency when not needed anyway. My CPU runs at 1000hz probably 90% of the time.

tekkidd
March 5th, 2010, 03:59 AM
I dont recomend overclocking especially on a laptop

Psumi
March 5th, 2010, 07:00 AM
I dont recomend overclocking especially on a laptop

That's why I try to buy laptops over desktops.

I hate overclocking, and never want to deal with it.

nerdy_kid
March 5th, 2010, 02:59 PM
thanks guys! :D


if it's the 1.4Ghz in your Sig then you'll only have about 10 seconds of usable time on the laptop before the CPU cooks and you've got a smoking paperweight of a laptop.

At most you'll get the CPU up to 1.8 (even then the heat will cause erors and thermal cutouts.)
If you can swap out the CPU then it might be worth doing that! (you'll have to change the heatsink as well)
Otherwise If you want a faster laptop, get a new laptop :D

im gonna go the new cpu route, but my laptop had a selection of CPUs when i bought, and i chose the slowest cause i was poor at the time :lolflag: Would still I have to change the heatsink? I would think that I could just keep the old heatsink and upgrade the CPU. I plan on getting a 2.4-3.2ghz dual core.

Post Monkeh
March 5th, 2010, 03:15 PM
thanks guys! :D



im gonna go the new cpu route, but my laptop had a selection of CPUs when i bought, and i chose the slowest cause i was poor at the time :lolflag: Would still I have to change the heatsink? I would think that I could just keep the old heatsink and upgrade the CPU. I plan on getting a 2.4-3.2ghz dual core.

most cpus come with a heatsink i think. any i've bought have anyway.

Nburnes
March 5th, 2010, 03:18 PM
That's why I try to buy laptops over desktops.

I hate overclocking, and never want to deal with it.
You wouldn't have to deal with it if you bought a desktop? It is entirely your choice.

LowSky
March 5th, 2010, 03:49 PM
was wondering if overclocking my laptop to say...2.4Ghz would generate more heat then if i bought a 2.4Ghz CPU.

More than likely


CPU's are generally made in batches and are allocated speeds based upon the quality of the final product - the ones that are simply not capable of a fast speed without errors are sold for less.

Every now and then they do a 'die shrink' and make it smaller - less size = less electricity = less heat. With decent cooling (unlikely in a laptop) you can get more out of a CPU than you are meant to due to margins of error.

But don't do it. The sacrifice in stability is never worth the gains in speed. If you really want a faster CPU buy one - but bear in mind that the bottleneck in a modern system is rarely the CPU anymore. More RAM or an SSD drive will commonly provide more value.

Actually the sacrifice is little on many new models, My AMD Phenom II x2 550 is unlocked to 4 cores and overclocked to 3.5 from 3.1. It works fine and isn't much hotter. (mid 30s to low 40s degrees in Celsius) I paid $110 and now have a chip that was selling for $250 at the time. Worth it to me. But I know what I'm doing and I'm using a desktop.



I would think it not worth the trouble. If you run ondemand, then it will use less frequency when not needed anyway. My CPU runs at 1000hz probably 90% of the time.

I lowered the FSB on my HTPC's CPU, it means lower temps and less fan noise because it wont max out as high.


I dont recomend overclocking especially on a laptop

Most laptops can't be overclocked. And the ones that can are pretty big and heavy usually the gamer models, and don't have much overhead room, as they have small heatsinks. you might get a few hundred more MHz


most cpus come with a heatsink i think. any i've bought have anyway.

Not laptop CPUs, most need a certain one for the chassis to fit properly. And most are made witha certain chip in mind. a 1.6Ghz chip might have a much smaller heatsink than a 2.4Ghz model.





im gonna go the new cpu route, but my laptop had a selection of CPUs when i bought, and i chose the slowest cause i was poor at the time :lolflag: Would still I have to change the heatsink? I would think that I could just keep the old heatsink and upgrade the CPU. I plan on getting a 2.4-3.2ghz dual core.

Sorry to break your spirits, but are you really sure you can? Just because it was sold with different CPU options, those options might have had different motherboards, heatsinks, power supplies, or chips that are not available anymore. Do you know how to even open up the laptop or to install a CPU?

My advice is don't do it, and buy a new machine. This time get don't skimp.

nerdy_kid
March 5th, 2010, 06:50 PM
ive taken this laptop apart about 4 or 5 times :D ive fixed other peoples laptops/desktops as well, so yes as far as taking it apart i definitely know what im doing. also, a new cpu is only ~$80 and a new laptop is $800...no way. It is a Dell, maybe i will just call them and ask. I am fairly certain that the motherboard stayed the same across the cpu speeds, the heatsink is tied into the gfx card, and i have seen pictures (of the heatsink area) of the same laptop with higher cpu speed and everything looked identical. http://miket-blog.blogspot.com/2008/03/dell-vostro-1500-cpu-upgrade-to-penryn.html is a photo. the X shaped sink by the fan is the cpu. I think the blog pretty much answers my question actually.

cascade9
March 5th, 2010, 07:06 PM
was wondering if overclocking my laptop to say...2.4Ghz would generate more heat then if i bought a 2.4Ghz CPU.

thanks :)

Yes. Even if you could overclock it without putting more voltage into the chip it will put out more heat at load ( at idle the heat output would probably stay the same.....if you can run the same voltage)


On a slightly related note, does anyone ever underclock their CPU's? Is that even possible? If you had this really powerful CPU but didn't do much beside the standard web browsing/word processing thing (and didn't feel like helping to search for aliens), mightn't clock-cycles-for-lower-temperatures be a good tradeoff?

I've underclocked quite a few times. Mainly as a system test, but also for general usage- e.g. I used to underclock my AMD 2200+ from 1795 down to 1200 or so. Why? Because I could run the fan at less RPM (noisy thing it was) and not cook the chip when I went to high load situations.

nerdy_kid
March 5th, 2010, 08:46 PM
well thanks everyone for your help! Been very helpful.

thanks again :D