Is CPU OverClocking Even Worth it Anymore?

Intel has unleashed the H310 and B360 Series budget Motherboards. Is the Premium for Overclocking Worth It Anymore?

Previous Video:
Post Coffee Lake: Tips on Choosing the Right CPU for YOU!:

Sources:

[pcfred]

People worried about a few frames a second had better cut their eyelids off. Because every time they blink they're missing frames!

[outtheredude]

My modestly priced, yet solidly built Gigabyte Z97X-UD3H-BK motherboard automatically applies a mild 4.4GHz boost clock to all 4 cores of my 4790K using just BIOS defaults with the F4 BIOS. With the 4790K costing just £20 more than the 4790 at the time I got it, having an easy 0.4GHz all core overclock with my Gigabyte motherboard, inside a case with good airflow, and a modestly priced after market cooler like the Zalman CNPS 9900 Max, I simply don't need to do anything more for a fast, stable, and responsive build.

[Obie]

Sandy/Ivy bridge has been the last time I seriously overclocked. 3.4ghz to 4.4ghz is insane boost on my 2600k back in the day on air. (easy) Bumped up speeds when I needed it over the years. (i7 still running great with my GTX 1060 6 gig) Overclocking has its uses but haven't needed it even with my latest AMD Ryzen 1600x build a couple months back. Investing in expensive over the top AIO's, air coolers. Or motherboards for extra few fps starts getting foolish and wasteful for me. Thanks for the informative video.

[wakesake]

well GPU oc is almost gone
example when using the Nvidia GTX 1080Ti Strix OC version, when i oc it i barely got +100mhz (on air)
The card boosted itself soooo well i didnt had to do anything
With AMD cards they are already running maxed out out of the box
so with GPUs the only way to oc is to go extreme cooling

With CPUs on the other hand its still "fun" but like you said we dont really get much of it unless we use the same CPu for over 5 years, then the oc Will Help increase fps in games

[MrTcheMan]

Worth for AMD cpus... there's no K+Z tax.

[kgb]

I bought the exact same chip for the exact same reason. I did see absolutely no point in running my cpu constantly on such a high frequency that I do not even use. Also I'm using Radeon Chill wherever I can and honestly, seeing 40-50w power consumption instead of 140w feels good man. 1080p which totally satisfies me, does not require more at all. Good vid, sharing the opinion 100%.

[decadentia]

I went from a i5 4670k which easily OC'ed to 4.4ghz which I thought was cool. Then looked at reviews and I was really surprised that the i7 8700k doesn't seem to OC too high. In the end got a killer deal on the i7 8700 (non k) and don't regret it one bit.

[DmitriWeissman]

Totally agree that i5-8600K is not worth it. It would be better to get i7-8700 (non K) for about the same price for both performance and "future proofing".
Modern CPUs with frequencies above 3.8GHz are sufficient for ~100FPS target.
Overclocking is handy for long term. I mean in a couple of years instead of upgrading the system, it is possible to squeeze 20-30% of the system by tweaking CPU and memory subsystem (RAM frequency and timings, memory controller, whatever interconnect).
But again, on the intel side, i see no point in getting to overclocking with less than i7-8700K.
Ryzen loves RAM and IMC tweaking - but nothing special is required for that.

[AvroBellow]

Overclocking was never a big deal for me. If I buy a new CPU that I need to OC, then I should be buying a faster CPU. To me, overclocking is what you do to extend the life of the CPU. That way, you're only ever overclocking an old and therefore expendable CPU. You also get a nice little speed boost for when your CPU starts to feel sluggish. There's also the advantage that, since you're only extending the life of the CPU, you won't be running it overclocked for nearly as long as if you overclocked it when new.

[ggchbgigghb]

Overclocking is going to be less relevant when games properly utilise as many cores as possible.

[singular]

In using a i7 6700 non k with 90$ ASRock z170 Mobo...OC to 4.0 GHz on all cores and memory up to 2933mhz.

Power consumption is about 20w lower than 6700k with same Mobo...but soent 85$ less.

But what really makes a difference is my rx480 overclock to 1450mhz over the 1200mhz base. And memory goes to 2200mhz

[Dobermanator]

It's almost like you are playing Devils advocate here. Many Tech Channels would name what you say as blasphemy towards Overclocking CPU's as that's typically a tool they use to declare "their" winners. You're suggesting they are wasting most people time in doing what they do - as you've made a very solid argument against o/c. Also you are highlighting how much more efficient CPU's can be and specifically AMD's too. Typically Tech Channels often detail or draw attention to efficiency *only* when AMD reaches Intel performance levels and Tech Channels need to go to the next metric to justify their Intel subjective preference. You are on the other hand place that efficiency metric higher up on the scale of importance which is definitely a viable point. Personally, I agree with you, what you say makes sense. Another aspect to consider is often what you see are differences achieved in o/c vs no o/c at most of 10 - 20 fps, likely even less than that. When a game is being played above 60 fps and you tested someone and asked them to identify a PC running at 60 / 70 / 80 fps would they reliably be able to do that? I know myself I can't, and I suspect many others can't either which goes to support what you say and can be an indicator of what Tech Channels say / do as a lot of hype. Do you think we will see many Tech Channels doing video benches of games now the B360 is out? I've seen only one so far and it only had synthetics, not games.

[venger]

We need these DDR4 Prices to drop.... so we can actually have a " budget" build

[JobeStroud]

As someone who does loads upon loads of emulation. OCing is really only useful for emulation and very specific tasks. For general gamers, your videocard is generally your bottleneck or on the same level of the CPU. So OCing doesn't really help. It ALSO depends on the game. MMOs are very CPU dependent. So OCing is generally a good thing. FPS games, it doesn't matter at all considering 60% + of the workload is dropped on the GPU.
So the answer is both yes and no. If I am going to emulate I have my OC profile for it in BIOS. If I am not going to emulate, then no. I tend to leave it at stock. Why waste power if I don't need too.

[ragingmonk]

Great video and useful info.
I bought the 1600X even when tech reviewers were saying the 1600 was better value. My thoughts were that if AMD thought that silicon could handle being ran at higher spec it would have been a 1600X from the start. This is not the old days and companies push the profit margin, they know what they are selling.
I get 3.7 and 4.1 turbo at stock my 1600X. On the first bios I hit nearly 4.3 on turbo which you can see on my google+.

With modern CPU's it seems the GPU is the bottleneck. So if you have a 7700K. 8700K, 1800X or 1600X but use a 1060, 580, 480 or less over clocking the CPU is negligible. The days of FX series over clocking to catch up to GPU is gone.

[JAD]

Thank you for sharing such a realistic and well made video! I can't believe so many people are chomping at the bit for a 10% or less increase in FPS when performance increase is becomes less and less noticeable.

[Nick-blhm]

Be honest Chris, actual overclocking died a long time ago. Probably before Sandy Bridge came out. I cant remember overclocking like the good old days of AMD Athlons

[mattsmechanicalssi]

My i7-4820k goes to 3.9GHz stock. I have it running at 4.4GHz stable all the time. There is a noticeable difference in performance. I can make it hit 5GHz, just don't like to run it at that speed all the time. I just don't see the point of saving a little bit of money, to miss out on massive performance gains. If I wanted to save money, and get a locked system, I'd buy a console! I've been working with computers since the 8088/8086, Apple 2e, and even the (I know you're all going to laugh at this one) VIC 20. I really enjoy overclocking, seeing how far I can push the technology past what is is rated to do. It is something both frustrating and satisfying, at the same time. Just my opinion though

[fuckoff]

The last great overclocking cpu I owned was the I7 920. I managed to push mine from 2.66 ghz to 4.0 ghz and there are people who pushed it to 4.2 without much trouble. That's close to 80% increase in power and it handled it like a charm. I still have it in a pc that I no longer use, but it still works fine. Right now I have the I7 6700k that I've overclocked from 4.0 to 4.8 and it can't go further than that. I considered getting the 8700k, but seeing the relatively small difference the overclock provides and the relatively small performance difference I would get from the 8700k Ive decided to just wait.

[WinZard]

overclocking actually went away years ago because of the spikes or up and a few fps looks good on a graph or synthetic bench. but in actual use its more like riding a good horse vs a wild bucking a mild oc here and there is ok though. all about total system and always has been. IMO