Bored..... pioneer days of OC'ing are over?

C

chrisf6969

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 27, 2003
Messages
9,011
Are the days of 50% overclocks and awesome new technology over ?

1st PC after C64 was a Pentium 166Mhz,
then my 700e @ 1040Mhz (150 FSB)
then my 1.6a @ 2.4Ghz (600FSB)
then my 2.4C @ 3.6Ghz (1200 FSB)

each step was a HUGE improvement over the previous generation, but for most people there hasn't been much reason to upgrade over the past 2 years.

the closest thing now might be a 630 which does about 33% OC fairly easily and some lucky ones might get close to a 50% OC (but not much faster than my current s478 system)

then on the AMD side of the fence maybe the 939pin opterons at 1.8-2.0GHz are doing around 50% OC.

But the OMG wow factor isn't there anymore. We're barely any faster than we were 2 years ago in general. And I don't see any huge improvement like we had seen from 1995-2003. It just seem like the pioneering fun days of overclocking are coming to an end! :(

So the next few years we're going to get huge increases in processing (IF the application is multi-threaded) but generally we'll get NOTHING! And the more parallel processing power, the less these things overclock. Ex: dual cores can't go quite as high as single, or GPU's have much lower clocks than CPU's, etc...

It just looks like I'm going to be bored with the new technology.

What do you guys think?
 
i think you're not playing the latest batch of games at high enough quality to demand that kind of rig, or else you're just getting bored of oc'ing.. the latter is a bad thing ;)
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
i think you're not playing the latest batch of games at high enough quality to demand that kind of rig, or else you're just getting bored of oc'ing.. the latter is a bad thing ;)
Click to expand...

BTW, I was talking about the CPU's & memory. (GPU's are still making decent improvements.) But look at the CPU's & ram for the past 2 years. Very LITTLE has improved. DDR2 offers very little, the newest CPU's are only a little faster than CPU's released almost 2 years ago. In fact if it wasn't for SLI, PCIe would be a completely boring lateral (not really improving performance) technology too.

I play most things at my 1152x864 @ 100Hz refresh rate with Vsync on & 4xAA if possible, if not 2x AA. I like my min. frame rate to 60fps so I have no chance of hitching or dying from slow fps. I really demand high fps and I hate it when things aren't buttery smooth.

I pay BF2 mostly. Haven't gotten in to Quake4, played single player for a few maps and got kinda bored with its repetitiveness. Reminded me too much of Doom3. I used to play Soldier of Fortune 2 religiously until just recently. (now that BF2 is my game of choice)

If I'm not mistaken BF2 is one of the most demanding games, besides maybe FEAR. Anyway, I was just thinking the outlook for the future seems kinda boring. And in general the past 2 years has been kinda boring.
 
well less overclocking is a good thing, means the cores are better and we don't have to beat the shit out of em to get the performance we want. And your user title (especialy that pic) always gets a smile out of me. What did you do to get it?
 
I've noticed things slow down alot as well. That's why I held onto my mobile 2500+ for almost 15 months (new record for me), as nothing really spectacular came out. I finally jumped when the venice cores came out and got the first of 2 in june, then the 2nd about 3 weeks later. I'm pretty happy with my 61% oc on the first chip.
 
The "newest" OC rage seems to be the 939 Opterons, some pretty impressive (Athlon XP-M-esque) overclocks are going on. I held onto my 2500+ mobile for quite some time as well.
 
Now were stuffing 2 cores on each chip, massive jumps may be slowing down, but its a common topic that pops up now and then, partially based on how a person may upgrade.

Also compare those FSBs equally, You went from 150, to 150, to 300 mhz FSB.

When the P4 As came out they were no big jump at all LOL
 
dothans get near 100% oc's on air cooling ;) and there cheap too.. i got a celeron m at 2.2 ghz that cost me $35 that spanks a 4 ghz prescott...

when my friend finaly gets around to sending me the 760 and my volt modded x850 xt-pe, and 2x512 bh-5 there will be quite a large boost in performance over the 4 ghz 3.2e i had :D, hell a 730 that was a lame ocer and wouldnt go past 2.4 ghz owned the 4 ghz prescott(80,000 am3's vs 75,000 and 45-60 fps in ut2k4 tydal vs dothans 70-100 fps) and got temps that would leave most a64 users in envy

performance change not there? i think your not looking in the right places
 
Pentium M / Opteron 14x's are bright spots on a mostly boring landscape lately.

I'm curious to see Merom, Yonah, etc...
 
ryuji said:
dothans get near 100% oc's on air cooling ;) and there cheap too.. i got a celeron m at 2.2 ghz that cost me $35 that spanks a 4 ghz prescott...

when my friend finaly gets around to sending me the 760 and my volt modded x850 xt-pe, and 2x512 bh-5 there will be quite a large boost in performance over the 4 ghz 3.2e i had :D, hell a 730 that was a lame ocer and wouldnt go past 2.4 ghz owned the 4 ghz prescott(80,000 am3's vs 75,000 and 45-60 fps in ut2k4 tydal vs dothans 70-100 fps) and got temps that would leave most a64 users in envy

performance change not there? i think your not looking in the right places
Click to expand...

Quoted for truth...

Fact of the matter is that most people are looking at things the wrong way and not realising the more minute differences in some of the core revisions and looking at the black and white numbers. Sure a dothan might only hit a 50% OC...but remember that that dothan at 2.8-3GHz can very easily beat the $hit out of a Precott a good 1GHz faster then it...and leaves far too many A64 users in the dust...depending on what you're using the rig for.

There are still/and have been many nice improvements in the OC'ing world going on, granted maybe not AS large as previously seen, but I think most of the problem is that it takes SO much more understanding on not just the technology, but of more extreme cooling methods (sometimes) and far more cash to GET TO these higher levels of OC'ing today that a lot of people have become discouraged.
 
cornelious0_0 said:
Quoted for truth...

Fact of the matter is that most people are looking at things the wrong way and not realising the more minute differences in some of the core revisions and looking at the black and white numbers. Sure a dothan might only hit a 50% OC...but remember that that dothan at 2.8-3GHz can very easily beat the $hit out of a Precott a good 1GHz faster then it...and leaves far too many A64 users in the dust...depending on what you're using the rig for.
Click to expand...
only reason why dothan doesnt really shine in benchmarking is lack of pci express boards...other then that to match a 3 ghz dothan you would need a 3.3~3.5 ghz or so on the a64(just how often does that happen? ;) ) again the reason there not famous is the rarity of pci-e boards that can oc... maybe with my future p4gd1+volt modded x850 xt-pe setup i can change that :)
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
i think you're not playing the latest batch of games at high enough quality to demand that kind of rig, or else you're just getting bored of oc'ing.. the latter is a bad thing ;)
Click to expand...
Yeah, some no-talent programmers write an engine that has piss-poor memory management, and leaks the memory on your video card, but instead of fixing it - they call it 'revolutionary', and everybody is happy.

This is probably why I find myself playing an old, yet fun, Quake3 mod, War3 and sometimes, even multiplayer Doom2. Not to mention old FF games for SNES/NES. Even though I own FarCry, BF2, Q4 just to name a few [shitty games, that is].

It's rather cryptic, actually.
Time, Money, Features, Quality, Graphics, Gameplay.
Pick any 2.
 
I think i did a nice jump with my Venice 3500 @ 3.2....very nice improvement.
 
iddqd said:
Yeah, some no-talent programmers write an engine that has piss-poor memory management, and leaks the memory on your video card, but instead of fixing it - they call it 'revolutionary', and everybody is happy.

This is probably why I find myself playing an old, yet fun, Quake3 mod, War3 and sometimes, even multiplayer Doom2. Not to mention old FF games for SNES/NES. Even though I own FarCry, BF2, Q4 just to name a few [shitty games, that is].

It's rather cryptic, actually.
Time, Money, Features, Quality, Graphics, Gameplay.
Pick any 2.
Click to expand...

I still love Quake 3, Rocket Arena (mod for Q3), Soldier of Fortune 2, Wolfenstein ET. And all 4 of those are based of the Q3 engine. But since I've had them so long and played them so much they get a little boring and I've finally moved to BF2. I like the variety of the gameplay in BF2, with so many Kits, Vehicles, etc...
 
Oh. Well, BF2 clearly suffers from a lack of features. 4 good maps, one game mode will only take you so far. I thought I would never put it away, but now that I'm a Gunnery Sergeant, I don't want to play anymore. Just bored of it as fuck. That's like... 85 hours of play time? I've spent over 2000 hours on Diablo II back in the day, and I only quit after they ruined the game with patch 1.10. I easily spent just as much playing Urban Terror (Q3 mod). It doesn't even have any long-term goals like DII does, just a stupidly fast shooter.

I personally feel like BF2 was a huge waste of money on my part, for the amout of entertainment I got out of it. I'll probably pirate the expansion to see how shitty it is. 8 new maps, 10 guns and 5 vehicles, and that's supposed to be worth $30? Yeah ok :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top