overclocking and temp issues.

[royalmarine]

if you didnt need to worry about temps, could you overclock higher than say 4.5ghz?

i mean if there was a way of keeping the cpu at say 40oC permantly?

 

[taylormsj]

Depends on what cpu, mobo and ram you have, aswell as a power supply. But to get to 4.5 youd need a lot of voltage, and too much of this can damage the motherboard, regardless of temperatures.

 

[royalmarine]

ah i understand the basics of it.

i was wondering "if" threre was a motherboard capable of passing a lot of voltage and you didnt need to worry about temp's could you "theoritically" clock past 5ghz?

 

[porterjw]

people clock past 5 ghz - do a You Tube search for it. It takes liquid nitrogen cooling though.

 

[royalmarine]

thats what im wondering.

if you could keep your cpu cold, could you " in theory " clock a lot higher?

 

[StrangleHold]

Of course the cooler you keep it the higher it will clock, but theres still a voltage limit it will take no matter how cold it is.

 

[porterjw]

^ agreed

I've no idea what they were running for voltage as the videos I saw never showed that, but it's impressive seeing some of those clock speeds even if the MoBo melted afterwards

 

[StrangleHold]

As far as voltage, like the Athlon 64 seriers 754-AM2 the onboard memory controller ran at the same voltage as the cores, so when you overclocked and tried rasing the voltage it raised the memory controller voltage too. A lot of times when you thought you were at the max overclock it might have had not anything to do with the cores you just hit the memory controllers limit (Lock up). Thats one reason the AM2+ is suppost to clock better, well when they get the L3 bug fixed with the B3 stepping. Because the memory controller and the cores have seprate voltage settings so when you raise the core voltage to get a better clock because you can leave the controllers voltage at default.