From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0730138626 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:23:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 07FD521C08F; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:22:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50A6521C018 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:22:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44B0F33BDD3 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:22:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.286 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.286 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.913, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6IsNi9tTyi9R for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:22:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 938BE33DA43 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:22:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ty1EB-0003jr-8b for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:22:59 +0100 Received: from athedsl-358384.home.otenet.gr ([85.72.255.142]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:22:59 +0100 Received: from realnc by athedsl-358384.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:22:59 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Overclocking CPU causes segmentation fault Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:22:03 +0200 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <50FE429A.8060708@nileshgr.com> <50FEDC01.9080306@googlemail.com> <50FEDE38.2010100@nileshgr.com> <50FF4307.1010609@gmail.com> <50FFD2EB.9030402@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-358384.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 In-Reply-To: <50FFD2EB.9030402@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 7d724d19-83be-44b2-b115-4c40f3f2692c X-Archives-Hash: 186ecea47634b9f1c20e933da2eba3fe On 23/01/13 14:09, Dale wrote: > Nikos Chantziaras wrote: >> On 23/01/13 03:55, Dale wrote: >>> [...] >>> I tired overclocking once a good while back. It just wasn't worth it. >> >> I've been running a Core 2 Duo from 2.4Ghz to 3.4Ghz for over three >> years. Instead of a new CPU, I only bought a €30 cooler. >> >> Oh, it *was* totally worth it. Mainly for games, where the >> performance difference was really dramatic. >> > > I doubt most get that lucky tho. After all, overclocking is mostly > luck. Some CPU's won't overclock that much long term because of either > the CPU itself or some other component that can't handle the increase. > When you overclock, you are searching for that weak link. Most of the > time, you find that weak link. In my experience, most of the time you can overclock. The issue is with the user not knowing exactly how to do it. You need to understand a few things and how they affect each other. It's not just a knob you can turn.