No, it certainly isn't shocking. And that's why I specifically mentioned that it's my "personal" point of view.
There are lots of anecdotal evidence that higher voltages are safe... for 6 months, a year, etc. Heck, even as someone said earlier, if you fry it, just replace it as it was a cheap part anyway... an absolute valid point. For me, I haven't upgraded since my Athlon 64 3500+, so you can figure out just how many years I'd like this system to last me. So, for me, the safer bet is for a more conservative voltage.
And by the way, I never meant to imply that YOU or anyone else specifically should never go near 1.45V... you purchased it, you do whatever you want with it. Intel engineers set a spec based on much thorough determinations other than just verifying thermal integrity, so for ME, I would never go anywhere near the spec'd Vmax. As I said you have valid points, unless you're an Intel engineer, you can't say that my point is invalid.
Edited by cmd512 - 5/28/09 at 9:40am
Originally Posted by spar
Yeah I know that diagram.
But that isnt what I meant. I was more referring to user experiences. I know Intel's specs for the E5200, but regardless of that, Ive seen a lot of people going over it for longer periods of time. Well not 1.45V, cause I think we can all agree that isnt really smart for a 24/7 overclock, which most people try to achieve. But 1.4V on a 50% OC, running 24/7 isnt really shocking.
To say you should be nowhere near 1.45V, or like BlankThis worries going over 1.4V, better yet, 1.46V will fry your chip within a year, is wrong. (I could've misunderstood that part of his post though)
Edit: 100th post!