Man but your supposed to be able to overclock the bus on those babies to 1
Ghz...that would be too hard to resist for me, and many people have been
doing it succesfully. Heck even the Mobo manufacturers are advertising
these as overclockable. But I digress. If you've never done it, or are
thinking about experimenting, I wouldn't recomend it either.

--
Night_Seer
"madgamer" <madgamer2@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:3F1F4862.8090205@mchsi.com...
> unless you just like tinkering with your system I would advise the do
> not do it approach. Unless you have much experience. Part of the thing
> with this overclocking is pushing your system to the edge. so be sane
> and do not overclock
>
> MiniMe wrote:
> > I'll be picking up my new P4 3.0C system tomorrow. The motherboard is
Asus
> > P4C800-E Deluxe. I'll be experimenting with overclocking. Do boards have
a
> > shorter lifespan under overclocking?
> >
> > I have third-party cooling for the processor. I plan to place the
computer
> > next to an air conditioner vent, which should cool down the unit a lot.
Does
> > anyone see a problem with this?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
>

this is true the mobo guys do say this but the point is, as I see it, is
THEY don't do it. they are the winners in the end if you buy because you
can overclock they win. if the mobo dies from it you buy and again. I
think that man has this need to do for no other reason than he can do
it.So the act of doing it becomes more important than the results. I ask
myself how fast is fast enough ..... your vid card does 300 fps and mine
does 60fps. 60 fps is flicker free so what does it really matter. I
think in the end we do it because we can and have a chance to to have
the latest and greatest for a quick second in time.... I know that is
hard to resist, I can't resist it either:-).

Night_Seer wrote:
> Man but your supposed to be able to overclock the bus on those babies to 1
> Ghz...that would be too hard to resist for me, and many people have been
> doing it succesfully. Heck even the Mobo manufacturers are advertising
> these as overclockable. But I digress. If you've never done it, or are
> thinking about experimenting, I wouldn't recomend it either.
>

"madgamer" <madgamer2@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:3F296A97.2000701@mchsi.com...
> this is true the mobo guys do say this but the point is, as I see it, is
> THEY don't do it. they are the winners in the end if you buy because you
> can overclock they win. if the mobo dies from it you buy and again. I
> think that man has this need to do for no other reason than he can do
> it.So the act of doing it becomes more important than the results. I ask
> myself how fast is fast enough ..... your vid card does 300 fps and mine
> does 60fps. 60 fps is flicker free so what does it really matter. I
> think in the end we do it because we can and have a chance to to have
> the latest and greatest for a quick second in time.... I know that is
> hard to resist, I can't resist it either:-).
>

Basically your right, and I agree with you on most everything you said,
but also, if you regularly overclock (which I don't) and you can overclock a
P4c 2.4 gHz computer up to 2.8 speeds (or whatever it is), and you save
money doing it, knowing the risks invovled of course, then why wouldn't they
do it? But then again why is 2.8 better than 2.4 right...well most people
couldn't tell the difference, but try working on movies and music, and
encoding all that stuff, which is getting more popular these days, and you
can see a signficant difference from one to the other. I encoded 40 GB
worth of music from my CD's, which took forever. That's about 4000 songs,
if I saved 10 seconds per song, that's about 11 hours I would have cut out
of encoding all that. Videos are even worse (I just got a DVD burner, and
am doing home movies to DVD). I guess in the end it all depends on what
your going to do with the comp. Nothing more than internet and word
processing, and you'd be better off with a celeron or duron or something.

--
Night_Seer

this discussion is getting interesting. we are both right. You are into
audio and music and for that you need all the computing power you can
muster. You can do what your doing or spend a bunch of money and get a
special system for that type stuff. The only other item I can pass on is
that I had a friend who was into audio stuff and used an overclocked
system and it became unstable and he lost a bunch of songs and other
audio sound files.the loss of the sound files was major as he was a
sound tech in a theater group. He did have back ups for most of the
files. I am sure that you know you are on that edgewhere if you push
your system to much......crunch. You do not strike me as a person who
would go that far. It has been interesting having this discussion let me
know if I can ever be of service.madgamer2@mchsi.com

Night_Seer wrote:

> "madgamer" <madgamer2@mchsi.com> wrote in message
> news:3F296A97.2000701@mchsi.com...
>
>>this is true the mobo guys do say this but the point is, as I see it, is
>>THEY don't do it. they are the winners in the end if you buy because you
>>can overclock they win. if the mobo dies from it you buy and again. I
>>think that man has this need to do for no other reason than he can do
>>it.So the act of doing it becomes more important than the results. I ask
>>myself how fast is fast enough ..... your vid card does 300 fps and mine
>>does 60fps. 60 fps is flicker free so what does it really matter. I
>>think in the end we do it because we can and have a chance to to have
>>the latest and greatest for a quick second in time.... I know that is
>>hard to resist, I can't resist it either:-).
>>
>
>
> Basically your right, and I agree with you on most everything you said,
> but also, if you regularly overclock (which I don't) and you can overclock a
> P4c 2.4 gHz computer up to 2.8 speeds (or whatever it is), and you save
> money doing it, knowing the risks invovled of course, then why wouldn't they
> do it? But then again why is 2.8 better than 2.4 right...well most people
> couldn't tell the difference, but try working on movies and music, and
> encoding all that stuff, which is getting more popular these days, and you
> can see a signficant difference from one to the other. I encoded 40 GB
> worth of music from my CD's, which took forever. That's about 4000 songs,
> if I saved 10 seconds per song, that's about 11 hours I would have cut out
> of encoding all that. Videos are even worse (I just got a DVD burner, and
> am doing home movies to DVD). I guess in the end it all depends on what
> your going to do with the comp. Nothing more than internet and word
> processing, and you'd be better off with a celeron or duron or something.
>