Ok here is the problem. I can't build my own machine. But if I order the same processor without being OC, isn't overclocking just as simple as going into the Bios on start-up (F12) and tabbing over to the processor menu and simply bumping it up. (that is what I did to my Dell 720 H2C). This new machine will be a liquid cooled machine so can't I just ignore temperatures/testing etc. and go close to what Alienware sells the same processor OC at(4mHz)? I mean it took me 30 seconds to O/C. Dell says it can take 1 week. Either I am getting ripped off $800 or I am really stupid on over-clocking. Please give me your expert thoughts. Keep in mind I am not too computer savy.Paul Gugliotta

Read a quick guide to overclocking. The trick is to set it up the most efficient and then test it for stability. If it is not stable, do not run it with those settings.

I can't build my own machine.

You really need to. I can build a better computer for you for half the price, it will last longer, and you can salvage components on your next build (CD drive, Hard drive, Case, Fans). There is simply no reasons why not to build your own PC other than the possibility that you just don't want to bother. In that case, just know you are really overpaying for what you're getting. Otherwise, building really isn't very hard. Honestly.

But if I order the same processor without being OC, isn't overclocking just as simple as going into the Bios on start-up (F12) and tabbing over to the processor menu and simply bumping it up.

Not really. There are many things involved in OC'ing. With i7 machines, the primary way to get your clock up is to start bumping the bclk up. This control everything, like the CPU itself, the NB, FSB, and other things. You also need to get your vdimm (or) vddr up on voltage to handle the extra data coming into the RAM (you can also change the latency (CAS) or change the mhz to make your system more stable). Things like the QPI, ICH, IOH, etc. need to also be changed in terms of voltage. C1E, EIST, and other Intel throttling technologies need to be disabled to battle clock throttle that is so annoying to us OC'ers. As you can see, its not as easy as it seems, especially if you want to do it right.

This new machine will be a liquid cooled machine so can't I just ignore temperatures/testing etc

NO! You can never ignore temps unless your using LN in a pot or something, and people that do that are usually OCing to 4, 5, 6GHz, so even they keep an eye on temps. No matter how you cool it, you MUST keep track of your temperatures. Water cooling is over rated. People that water cool, are doing it because its freakin awesome :( . I've done it before and it is very cool. But at the end of the day, the difference between a great CPU cooler and water cooling is negligible (especially when cost is taken into account).

Dell says it can take 1 week.

I'd say at least 50% of people ordering Alienwares have no idea what overclocking is. Dell just tells them its some magical thing that speeds your computer up, takes 1 week and costs $800. In reality, when I overclocked my i7-930, it took 3 days. This included changing the CPU and Memory to run correctly, interrupted by several 10 hour sessions of Prime95 to check my work and stability. Dell does it once in the lab, and then just goes into the computer your getting and changes a few things and BAM, an easy $800.

Either I am getting ripped off $800 or I am really stupid on over-clocking.

Your not stupid, you just need to read up on how to OC, and do it yourself instead of letting a corporation take a green bath in your misfortune. If you have any questions. [email protected] here if you want to ask some really smart people about OCing or building computers in general. www.overclock.net

my technician advised against overclocking

I'm afraid your technician isn't an expert in overclocking then is he? It's a bit like going to a doctor, if you go to see your GP [general practitioner] you'll get advice from a technician, someone who knows a little about a lot. On the other hand if you want some serious help, you go to see a medical specialist.The i7 range overclocks with ease. My i7 920 overclocks as high as 4.2GHz, no issues at all. When you have learned the basics [and it's not hard] test with the Intel burn test, and monitor temperatures with RealTemp. Keep below 80 degrees. And if you want to knock the temperatures back even further, disable hyper threading, that will cool your CPU another ten degrees.you need top-notch cooling though. I use the best air cooler out there, the Noctua NHD-14. It's quiet and super cool. That combined with Innovation Coolings Diamond paste, and you are in business.Martin Wilby

Since We're talking about CPUs and Overclocking here, and I believe I can get a good advice from folks here, this is -I'm looking at changing my stock liquid cooler (Asetek LCLC 550?)to a better one, and I'm considering the corsair hydro h70. If you look at the attached picture you'll see that the pipes are long, hence the radiator in front. But given the short pipes of the Corsair H70, my only option is to mount it at the rear under the PSU, where the case fan is. This is really my first time, so, don't laugh at these questions: 1. Would it make any difference if I, after removing the stock cooler, mount a second fan in front of the radiator fan, making it double (I plan to remove the stock fan at the back of the case and join it with his brother (stock radiator fan) at the front)? 2. With the push-pull on the corsair fans (by the way, I plan to use the Cooler Master Excalibur in place of the Corsair stock fans 'cos they're PMW) Which would be better, drawing air from the back of the pc into the case and expelling it through the front, with the fan(s) in front also helping (I could use some heat in the room since it's winter), or vice versa (drawing in air from the front fan(s) and doing the radiator push-pull so the air is pushed out the case from behind, rather than drawn in) 3. My PSU is 750w and I plan to replace my 12Gig 6 modules Elpida 1333MHz with 3 modules of the 4GB corsair Dominator 16000 or 2000 (with it's fans). Is my power supply enough (with the 2 new fans for the radiator increasing my fans to a total of 5(6 if I do double fans at the front)? 4. I plan on changing the gtx 295 to gtx 580, and I plan to change the PSU whenever I have enough money for SLi (for other games, of course) Would 1000w be enough? Also, I know PSU's are supposed to have a built-in fan, but the underside of my stock PSU is closed. Looking at the pic, is it possible that the fan is at the top (the PSU has a vent at the front (where the wires are) and at the back (where the Mains cable is)? Thanks for your help, anyone

They're charging $800 as a fee to OC the 980X? That's ridiculous if so and yes, a gigantic waste of money. Build your own machine, don't buy from someone like Alienware, those systems are almost always ripoffs.

They probably try to justify it by putting warranty on it themselves. But yes $800 is very expensive for a reflash of the bios.

Since We're talking about CPUs and Overclocking here, and I believe I can get a good advice from folks here, this is -I'm looking at changing my stock liquid cooler (Asetek LCLC 550?)to a better one, and I'm considering the corsair hydro h70. If you look at the attached picture you'll see that the pipes are long, hence the radiator in front. But given the short pipes of the Corsair H70, my only option is to mount it at the rear under the PSU, where the case fan is. This is really my first time, so, don't laugh at these questions:

That's where the CPU fan on the H50/H70 should be. You don't want it at the front because it will bring up the ambient temperature of the case, you instead want clean, cool air in through the front to whisk RAM and GPU heat away, and then that air being pushed through the radiator at the back.

1. Would it make any difference if I, after removing the stock cooler, mount a second fan in front of the radiator fan, making it double (I plan to remove the stock fan at the back of the case and join it with his brother (stock radiator fan) at the front)?

Don't bother. However, many people do a push-pull configuration on the radiator itself which is one fan on the front and another at the back. Some people even stack fans on more expensive water cooling builds. I have a push-pull on my Hyper 212 Plus (air CPU cooler) and I saw a drop of 5C with just the addition of a second fan.

2. With the push-pull on the corsair fans (by the way, I plan to use the Cooler Master Excalibur in place of the Corsair stock fans 'cos they're PMW) Which would be better, drawing air from the back of the pc into the case and expelling it through the front, with the fan(s) in front also helping (I could use some heat in the room since it's winter[/size]), or vice versa (drawing in air from the front fan(s) and doing the radiator push-pull so the air is pushed out the case from behind, rather than drawn in)

Draw air from the front and expel it at the back. A few reasons for this. One, it is normal :(. Two, both the GPU and the PSU expel air out the back, so taking that warm air and putting it back through the case and through the radiator is not real smart. Three, since the case you have is a consumer grade case, it is designed for airflow in a certain direction. In your case, air in the front, out through the back.

3. My PSU is 750w and I plan to replace my 12Gig 6 modules Elpida 1333MHz with 3 modules of the 4GB corsair Dominator 16000 or 2000 (with it's fans). Is my power supply enough (with the 2 new fans for the radiator increasing my fans to a total of 5(6 if I do double fans at the front)?

2000mhz RAM is a waste of money. Stick with a Triple module kit at 1600 with as low as possible Latency (X-X-X-XX type number. Or look at the CAS. It should be no more than 8... 6 or 7 is preferred. Also, MAKE SURE you get DDR3)

4. I plan on changing the gtx 295 to gtx 580, and I plan to change the PSU whenever I have enough money for SLi (for other games, of course) Would 1000w be enough? Also, I know PSU's are supposed to have a built-in fan, but the underside of my stock PSU is closed. Looking at the pic, is it possible that the fan is at the top (the PSU has a vent at the front (where the wires are) and at the back (where the Mains cable is)?

1000 watts is plenty. I recommend Corsair power supplies. They earn some of the best scores out there in terms of PSUs. I would be surprised if your Power Supply doesn't have a built in fan. However, its Dell, so anything is possible. When you buy a new power supply, it will most definitely have a built in fan. Just be sure it has a clear airflow so it can cool the components inside.On a side note, I do recommend you get a new, custom case. Antec 900 or 902 cases are superb and cost about $100. They are well worth it as no only can you use them over and over, but they are much more open in therms of airflow. They have two 120mm fans up front, a 120mm fan out back, and a 200mm fan at the top. It not only drops your ambient temps but also helps cool the CPU by moving air through the case pretty quick. If I am honest, I wouldn't get the Corsair H70. I would get a nice air cooler. Whenever you deal with a water cooler, you always risk a leak in the case spilling coolant all over your expensive new components. On Frostytech, the H50 (An earlier variant) gets an 81%. Which is good, but not the best.H50 Reviewhttp://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=2564Top 10 coolershttp://www.frostytech.com/top5heatsinks.cfm

Chidiebere:1. I have no idea but I don't think so...2. Drawing air from back is better, but makes hot air build up in chassis, that's why I prefer it to blow air outside.3. 750 is enough, if it can handle 6x2 modules it will handle 3x4 modules easily, but what for do you want to change that RAM? I have no idea about OCing Bloomefield, but if Your RAM is currently at it's 1333MHz there's no need to upgrade it to faster, there will be no gain in performance! Save the money for custom liquid cooling in place of that H70...4. 1000W should be enough for SLI. Looking at the pictures of your PC, I can tell that the PSU is mounted with fan on the top or on the side.

Hi All,On the same note as the original poster, wouldn't turbo-boost which is standard with the new i5 and i7 achieve close results to OC? Personally i have an i5-750 at stock frequency of 2.6, I can see short spikes to 3.2 while in game, but most of the time, just stays put at 2.6I understand a constant clock of 3.4GHz gets more things done in the same time but still, what is your opinion on turbo boost? The only issues I have with OC is noise, I prefer the sound of a turbofan instead of a PC fan :)Thanks and Happy Holidays to allStefan Ticusan

Hi All, First of all, i want to apologize for accidentally starting this thread in the wrong forum. I'm looking to upgrade my CPU and i've got my eye on the intel core i7 950 ( 3.08GHZ quad core if i recall correctly). I have been reviewing the forums for a while now and I learnt among other things that the processor is the single most important factor as far as framerates on FSX are concerned. I also noticed that much emphasis is placed on overclocking intel i7 processors to reap out maximum performance from FSX. I personally don't know much about computers but my technician advised against overclocking. What I hope to find out is:1. how much more benefits/risks would one expect form an overclocked i7 over the standard cpu?2. my present cpu is an AMD phenom II x2 (3.1ghz). How much better is the standard ( non-overclocked) i7 950 over this configuration, all other things remaining unchanged.Thanks, Nanjul

Hi All,On the same note as the original poster, wouldn't turbo-boost which is standard with the new i5 and i7 achieve close results to OC? Personally i have an i5-750 at stock frequency of 2.6, I can see short spikes to 3.2 while in game, but most of the time, just stays put at 2.6I understand a constant clock of 3.4GHz gets more things done in the same time but still, what is your opinion on turbo boost? The only issues I have with OC is noise, I prefer the sound of a turbofan instead of a PC fan :)Thanks and Happy Holidays to allStefan Ticusan

Turbo boost - the way this actually works on Intel chips is based around something called TDP (thermal design power). Say for the purpose of example that the TDP of your CPU is 100 watts. On a quad-core there's multiple ways to get to that 100W power. You could do 4 cores at 25W, you could do 2 cores at 50W, 1 core at 100W and so on with basically limitless combinations. That's what Intel's turbo boost is doing - if a task only calls for the use of 2 cores for example, it'll clock two cores up higher and shut down the other two. The total heat the chip is outputting is the same as if all 4 cores are in use at a slower clock speed.Turbo boost helps but its effect is specific to apps that aren't very multithreaded - old games that only run on a single core for example. FSX does use all 4 cores in a quad system.The other problem here is just that the speed turbo boost gets to is still way too low to see the huge benefits in FSX. 3.2 GHz is a lot less than 4.0GHz - the relationship between performance in FSX and the CPU clock speed is not linear - you get a lot more performance out of that top 3.8 to 4.2GHz area than you do with slower overclocks.

Thanks Ryan, good explanation. So it looks like turbo boost is just shifting available resources between cores within the same amount of maximum allowed dissipated power.The only way to push the limit up is with OC and a good cooler.

Turbo boost - the way this actually works on Intel chips is based around something called TDP (thermal design power). Say for the purpose of example that the TDP of your CPU is 100 watts. On a quad-core there's multiple ways to get to that 100W power. You could do 4 cores at 25W, you could do 2 cores at 50W, 1 core at 100W and so on with basically limitless combinations. That's what Intel's turbo boost is doing - if a task only calls for the use of 2 cores for example, it'll clock two cores up higher and shut down the other two. The total heat the chip is outputting is the same as if all 4 cores are in use at a slower clock speed.Turbo boost helps but its effect is specific to apps that aren't very multithreaded - old games that only run on a single core for example. FSX does use all 4 cores in a quad system.The other problem here is just that the speed turbo boost gets to is still way too low to see the huge benefits in FSX. 3.2 GHz is a lot less than 4.0GHz - the relationship between performance in FSX and the CPU clock speed is not linear - you get a lot more performance out of that top 3.8 to 4.2GHz area than you do with slower overclocks.

Never Have turbo boost on when you overclock just a heads up.

Never Have turbo boost on when you overclock just a heads up.

There's people who do it - you just have to be aware that it's effectively increasing your overclock at that point. If you have extremely good cooling you can try it but just pay very close attention to the temps...The big thing I turn off is Hyperthreading - that produces an insane amount of heat and it's of almost no use in games or FS.

Some motherboards allow users to force turbo boost, even if the cpu reaches max TDP. This means that you get a notch or two extra on the multiplier, at least for the i7. Some early chips overclocked alot better on uneven multiplier numbers (for example 19x or 21x), so with forced turbo boost you could force an i7 920 to run on 21x multiplier (the chip originally only allowed 12x-20x multis)

Yeah mine has that - I can use the turbo multipliers even with Turbo Boost off. My 860's at 21X multiplier and 190 Bclk.

There's people who do it - you just have to be aware that it's effectively increasing your overclock at that point. If you have extremely good cooling you can try it but just pay very close attention to the temps...The big thing I turn off is Hyperthreading - that produces an insane amount of heat and it's of almost no use in games or FS.

Really? Now that's some interesting info.But: when it's not active, why should it produce any heat? Not that I don't believe you, I just don't understand.Best Regards,Bert Van Bulck