[phantasmor]

if i get it, i save a but load, but if i overclock it to 4ghz, would it at least last 2.5 years? or should i spend the extra 40 something and get the i5 2500k, i mean i don't want to overclock it too much, does anyone know what the odds are? because if it like 80% or more i will just stick with the 2400, if it is lower, well....

 

[xPwn]

Get the 2500k it is unlocked and better!
it would also last like 10 years or more
if oced right.

 

[MarkG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phantasmor if i get it, i save a but load, but if i overclock it to 4ghz, would it at least last 2.5 years? or should i spend the extra 40 something and get the i5 2500k, i mean i don't want to overclock it too much, does anyone know what the odds are? because if it like 80% or more i will just stick with the 2400, if it is lower, well....

dude, it is possible, but I would say it is all down to how well you cool it

 

[TonyLee]

There is no way you are going to get the 2400 to 4ghz (not on all 4 cores I mean). You will have to use roughly 111 blck x 36 turbo which is not going to happen. Do consider the 2500k if you want a much easier way to overclock.

 

[phantasmor]

really? that is kind of bad news, but that just means my build just went up 40$, that is IF i want to overclock...... but i really don't believe that it can't be done, i want to hear from someone who has actually tried it, i don't believe that any processor could be that resistant to overclocking

 

[Vipr3]

Dude spend the extra 40 and get the i5-2500k. That processor is probably one of the best out there because it can OC so well. You will be able to get that thing to 4.5-5.0Ghz with no problem.

 

[TonyLee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phantasmor really? that is kind of bad news, but that just means my build just went up 40$, that is IF i want to overclock...... but i really don't believe that it can't be done, i want to hear from someone who has actually tried it, i don't believe that any processor could be that resistant to overclocking

It's not the cpu that is not capable, but the mainboard. Trying to run the base clock at 111 is dangerous for other components.

edit to add: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpu...idge-review/14

first post: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...php?t=18227651

Of course you can easily run all 4 cores at 3.6ghz, or if you do not want to overclock at all, then the 2400 will be a good cpu.

 

[phantasmor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyLee It's not the cpu that is not capable, but the mainboard. Trying to run the base clock at 111 is dangerous to other components.

i understand maybe half of what you are saying... what makes 2500k any different? wouldn't you do the same thing

 

[TonyLee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phantasmor i understand maybe half of what you are saying... what makes 2500k any different? wouldn't you do the same thing

The 2500k has an unlocked multiplier. The 2400 does not. If you want to run 4ghz with a 2500k, you just set the multiplier (or all the turbo multipliers) to 40 and you are done. There is no messing with the base clock of the mainboard at all.

 

[KieX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phantasmor i understand maybe half of what you are saying... what makes 2500k any different? wouldn't you do the same thing

To briefly expand on his post, with current P67 and H67 boards the bclk is tied in with other functions like PCI-e. Overclocking bclk is this not recommended as it leads to instability and possible damage.

The K series CPU overcomes that problem by using the unlocked multi to OC leaving the bclk at it's (stable) default.

You would need to wait for the Z series chipset before you can overclock with bclk to properly OC with non K SandyBridge CPUs (but we'll need to wait and see how true that is).

EDIT: Seems Tony Lee already beat me to it

 

[phantasmor]

wow! that is a bad design flaw! wow! i am just shocked!

 

[KieX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phantasmor wow! that is a bad design flaw! wow! i am just shocked!

Not so much a design flaw as a deliberate attempt to line up their pockets. Companies will be companies...

But as for longevity.. K series CPU and P67 motherboard will be a combo that could potentially last you quite a while in terms of performance. Sure it costs a little extra, but even if it's power savings alone it should be a worthwile investment IMHO.

 

[phantasmor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KieX Not so much a design flaw as a deliberate attempt to line up their pockets. Companies will be companies... But as for longevity.. K series CPU and P67 motherboard will be a combo that could potentially last you quite a while in terms of performance. Sure it costs a little extra, but even if it's power savings alone it should be a worthwile investment IMHO.

now THAT is a way of looking at it.... do you think there a way to mod it to work differently, ex:modded bios, software overclocking in windows, etc...

 

[KieX]

I doubt it, that's what Z series chipset is meant to offer.

Intel specs suggest that you can OC up to certain level using Turbo with non-K CPU with current P67 motherboards... but I have yet to see anyone post such a thing.