Confused about multipliers (overclocking)

V

vonfeldt7

New Member
I thought I understood everything about FSB speeds and multipliers, but I'm starting to get confused. I was looking on some other forums about the Q9450...and most people were talking about how they were disappointed in the Q9450's 8X multiplier.

If I'm understanding everything correctly...this low multiplier will mean that the Q9450 won't OC too terribly well (I heard 3.6GHz would be lucky) am I comprehending everything correctly? Is the poor OC true? (Or your hypothesis of if its true).

Lastly, the E8400 seems to be overclocking just fine, what is it's multiplier?

Thanks.
 
I cant see any reason why 8x multiplier will give poor OC.

Experienced overclockers use lower multipliers with high FSB for more bandwidth anyway.
 
A low multiplier will simply result in having to raise the FSB higher, when overclocking. It will not affect overclocking potential in any way except in that the RAM frequency will probably exceed it's ability to function at that speed, a RAM divider or changing the RAM speed will get rid of this occurrence. Specific motherboards can have something of a FSB wall, as well, in which it cannot stably run after a certain threshold, if at all.

Other than that, a low multiplier usually doesn't detract from overclocking in any serious way, it serves as little more than a small hurdle any competent overclocker can jump. So I agree with Taylor.
 
Last edited:
Okay, so you're saying that getting past 3.6GHz should be no problem?

I'm hoping to have it around/a little over 4GHz if it's at all possible. My case is the Antec 900, my HSF will be the Tuniq Tower 120, and my motherboard is the Asus Maximus Formula.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why you want to push a 300$ cpu that far, that is well over the 33% rule for overclocking, 500mhz over to be almost exact, and 3ghz on that processor should be more than enough to handle everything you would even think about throwing at it for at least 2 years.


but thats just me
 
Last edited:
andy_mitch92 said:
I don't understand why you want to push a 300$ cpu that far, that is well over the 33% rule for overclocking, 500mhz over to be almost exact, and 3ghz on that processor should be more than enough to handle everything you would even think about trowing at it for at least 2 years.


but thats just me
Click to expand...

First of all, I don't even think the 33% rule applies anymore, and second of all if I get a $300 processor, I'm going to get my money out of it. I'll probably replace it anyways in a few years...long before it should die.
 
Well to be fair, that chip IS going to be quite enough, stock, for quite awhile anyway. Overclocking probably won't even change anything, FPS in most games will probably remain unchanged. Benchmarking programs will show an increase, but personally, those are just a load of crap. Real-world use will be nominally affected, if at all.
 
Oh yes. Especially so if the app has good multi-threading support, which most encoding processes do. Encoding is one of those jobs that really benefit from overclocking, more so than anything else if I may say so. However there isn't a real mess of jobs that share such a feat, video editing is another one, and obviously gaming but to a certain extant. Gaming relies more heavily on the GPU in most cases, if you could overclock the GPU to the same level as a C2d chip, you'd be in business. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top