Celeron 566 to 1003mhz Possible with Alpha pep-66 ????
I got 2 questions. First I was wonder if
a 566 would be possible to run at 1003mhz
118fsb*8.5 . Also I know alot off people
overclock, and you crank you cpu's up from
600 to 800 and get them stable. Thats great
but what happens 6 months down the road or
1 year? How do the insides of the chip look?
I would think after running a 600@800 with
a tad voltage increase for a year would make
the insides look like an explosion ripped through. Am I wrong? How stable is that 600@800 goin be after 1 or 2 years of beening run overclocked? Thanks.
I agree with the Maxster... overclocking just makes sense...
Look at it this way:
Assume you, as a consumer want 1Ghz performance (or something real close), but a 1Ghz CPU costs at least $800, and probably more like $900 or more! That ain't no good! So, what to do? You buy a $100-$300 CPU and OC the snot out of it! BUT... your concern is about the longevity of that CPU, right? What if it only lasts 6 months to a year!?!?
Who cares if it does?
That's right! Who cares!
From a financial standpoint, it isn't going to matter. Think about this: If you buy a $900 CPU now, it's value (what you can buy a new one for) is going to depreciate by several hundred dollars over the next several months... far more than the entire price of a well overclocking chip!
Even if a chip overclocked to hell and back only lasts a year, it can be replaced with another when it dies for MUCH cheaper, and the price of the two together will STILL be cheaper than the price of a single "official" chip of the OC'ed speed when the first one was purchased!
Unless you do something REALLY radical, you're going to win. If this PIII 700@933 dies in 10 months, I STILL will have saved mucho bucks!
So then every day that a 566 is clocked at 850 it degrades. Everyday that passes the chip gets worse and worse? Like how long
do they stay same performance, before they
start to drop and drop and drop in perfformance, until oneday u go to turn on
you machine and bang its dead ?? Thanks for
your other responses. So how long do you give it?
No, it does not degrade noticebly for years. I ran a P3 650 cA2 at 910 for 6 months and it never missed a lick, runnin' SETI 24/7. I just got this 700 cBO because I had the "I want a Gig!" disease real bad
Overclocking a cpu past it's specified speed shouldn't speed up it's aging process that much at all. CPU's in the same family at different clock speeds are the exact same core as their brothers and sisters, just with different multipliers. Assuming they are operated within specification, would a 600 chip die faster than a 533? Probably not.
What does make a CPU die faster is giving it more juice than you're supposed to, and HEAT. Both of these of course are directly associated with overclocking
If this imaginary 566 @ 1003 could run at stock voltage, and had very good cooling, then Id say it could very well live for a ong time. Unfortunatly, this is not realistic. Overclocking a CPU that much almost always takes a significant boost in voltage, and at the same time put out lots of heat. Heat is bad, and will definatly shorten a CPU's life.
While it's true that pretty much anything you use that's mechanical or electrical will be one day closer to wearing out for each day that you use it, a CPU isn't like a car or a clothes drier that you have to kick to get started and becomes less of a performer over the course of its life... usually, when a CPU gives up the ghost, it's just DONE.
More like... a lightbulb, if you will--either it works, or it basically doesn't. In fact, I'd say the degradation in performance of a lightbulb is FAR more noticeable and prevelant in a lightbulb over the course of its life than a CPU!
What I'm getting at, is an overclocked CPU isn't going to go down in performance until its just dead. It, like any non-overcocked CPU... is closer to "burning out" like a lightbulb for each day that it is used.... it's like the saying: "The candle that burns twice as bright, burns half as long..."
So... do you want a $10 candle that lasts for 12 hours, or is the $2 candle that lasts for 4-10 hours the better deal?
I also failed to mention that my first big overclocking chip which was a Celeron 300a overclocked to 464Mhz... is now collecting dust in the bottom of a box.
Do I care if I reduced its lifespan from 10 to 5 years?
I only used it for 15 months and then set it aside (perfectly functional) to collect dust-- though it will probably soon become a third 'puter for the girlfriend... it's saved me a few hundred dollars already, and if it dies the very next time I try to boot it, I can replace it for next to nothing.
You all got some good points. I wanna
get a 566 and run it @850mhz. I have a
p3-550e coppermine on an abit-be6-2 mb with
128meg ram. I was deciding if I should get
a dvdrom or a 566 celey.
I've been a bit worried about clocking my
550e chip as it cost me around $450can in
april. If I paid little for it I wouldn't
mind clocking the thing. I guess thats why
im considering to sell it and buy that 566
and hey, if a 566 runs at 850, at 850 it
will perform on par to a p-3 700 so I still
win right. I only need it to last 1 year
mabey more iff I could.
Originally posted by Chipman_343: I only need it to last 1 year
mabey more iff I could.
Short of some kind of disaster like lightning striking your house or power poles, I don't see how it won't last you a good 5-10 years even if it's overclocked.
Remember, a Celeron II actually has a PIII core just with less on-die cache and thus less voltage. If the PIIIs can run at 1.65+ volts w/o a problem I can't see why the Celeron II will be 'damaged' by overclocking.
------------------ -=S_Klass=- I tweak... therefore I am.