• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

How long are CPUs made to last for?

VortX

VortX

VortX

Associate
Joined
24 Jan 2007
Posts
1,490
Location
Guildford
Okay, time and time again, I'm seeing threads about overclocking shortening the life of a CPU bla bla bla, people saying things like from 15 years to 10 years etc etc.

I'm curious as to the REAL FACTS, how long are CPU's made to last for? Take an average i7 CPU, how long SHOULD it last? Does overclocking it 'really' decrease its life span that much?

PLEASE CAN WE HAVE FACTS, EVIDENCE ETC. No 'opinions' or 'random guesses' give or take a decade rubbish lol, just want to find out how long they are actually made to last, whether its as long, or as short as we think.

Thanks :)
 
Risks of Overclocking the Processor

There are definite risks that you are taking when you decide to overclock your system processor. There is much debate over what the risks are, ranging from "don't worry, be happy" attitudes from many hackers to those who think overclocking is very dangerous (I guess I'm close to being in that category, although I think it is reasonable in some circumstances). I hope to list here the dangers but with a reasonable indication of how likely they are, and really I don't think I'm going off the deep end with any of this stuff.

Here are the possible outcomes you can expect when you overclock your processor. These apply to raising the clock speed of the processor only, if you are changing the system bus speed above its nominal rating you will need to read here as well.

Success:
The processor may overclock perfectly, and run stably for many years to come. There are thousands of people who have done this, and I am certainly not going to deny it. This is the best case outcome.
Immediate Destruction: It is possible to totally destroy a processor by attempting to overclock it. By destruction, I mean that the processor will not boot at the higher speed, and when returned to its normal speed, will continue to not function. This is basically the worst case outcome. This sort of permanent failure is very rare, but it does happen. It is made more likely by using inadequate cooling, and also by being ridiculously aggressive in how far you try to overclock (i.e., trying to run a Pentium 75 at 166 MHz.)
Non-Functionality: The processor may not work at the new speed, but may work fine when returned to its original speed. This is a fairly common outcome when overclocking, and in most cases the processor will not be any the worse for wear.

System Instability:
The processor may boot at the new speed, but you may see the system behave strangely. Random hard lockups, parity errors, resource conflicts, strange hard disk problems, beeping, application crashes and Windows refusing to boot are just the tip of the iceberg. Particularly insidious are the overclocks that work almost perfectly, because that occasional crash may be due to your operating system, but it may be due to that overclocked chip also.
Data Loss: It is very possible to lose data as a result of overclocking. If the processor is not functioning properly, you risk potentially damaging the structures of your hard disk's file system. It is also not uncommon for the Windows registry files to become corrupted, requiring a complete Windows reinstall. Needless to say, a full backup before overclocking is a wise move.

Electromigration:
When the processor is run at a speed that is higher than it is supposed to be run at, there is a chance that the internal components in the processor may break down over time. The internal features of a CPU are sized in the range of microns. It is possible that when the processor is stressed by running at too high a frequency, along with the extra heat that overclocking incurs, that the actual metal lines inside the processor may form shorts or opens and damage the processor over a period of time. How likely this is to happen, and how long it takes is really not known. The system may work fine for a while and then suddenly stop working.

In addition to the above, you should realize that overclocking a processor will reduce its serviceable lifetime. How long? Nobody can really say for sure, because nobody really knows how long a processor will last without overclocking. Controlling heat is a big part of this equation. When you see people on the 'net saying things like "without overclocking the chip would last 10 years and with overclocking it will last 5 years, so what do I care because I get a new chip every 2 years", just remember that they really have no way of knowing that they are reducing the CPU's lifespan by only 50%--it could be 90%. (And I don't know about you, but even when I upgrade, I don't throw out my old equipment if it still works...)

Also consider that hardware is not static; it ages, it changes over time--and it degrades over time. Even if overclocking works today, it may be working because you are just within the limits of what the system can handle. This doesn't mean that in six months or a year, changes in the hardware due to aging, heat or other stress factors won't cause failures or strange behavior to crop up.
Click to expand...

I don't like overclocking, tweaking engines, basically modifying anything above it's original status because common sense tells me to keep it as it was because there is the likely possibility it will be unstable and eventually be of no use.

Either way, i don't know what you mean by valid proof but i found this article on PCGuide.com. The only problem is, we'll never know for sure because Intel nor AMD label a CPU's lifespan, only the bits of material within the CPU that get's described as 'some rubber that guarantees a long life span'. I would say phone up if you're that interested, but the manufacturers would probably still withhold the information because they probably don't know themselves.

Trial and error is pretty much the only way to know.
 
Last edited:
In my experiance they go out of date before they fail, never really had a cpu fail it always just gets replaced with a faster model lol. Got 10+ year old cpu's that still work, but no point in using them now as they too slow to do anything usefull for me.
 
It largely depends on how much you do to it, if you dont increase the volts, the OCing isnt going to make any difference to the life span, if you increase the volts a small amount (as is sensible and the approach most ppl on here take) then it will reduce the life span by a short amount but for enthusiasts (which we are and you are if youre considering OCing) the chip will be out of date and youll of got rid of it long before its a concern anyway. If you overvolt heavily then yes lifespan starts to reduce dramatically here. Theres no hard and fast answer or numbers to use, because as with all things related to OCing, each chip is different, each chip will last a different amount of time whether you clock it or not. Hope that helps
 
I've only had one CPU die...well, it was either the CPU or the motherboard, we never found out. It was an Athlon Thunderbird 1.2GHz and was always running at stock speed. :/
 
mame said:
They used to say a CPU should last 20 years and overclocking halves this.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with this. Then again no one really knows for sure. An overclocked CPU may still operate the computer but be unstable after a time anyway, so if it is not your main pc you may not notice, because you may not be using it enough. Do you use that 386 much these days? If you say you use it for browsing the net..well, unlikely (my 486 runs our broadband like a modern pc runs a bad dialup connection).

As mentioned in 'Wes's quote, an overclocked cpu may become slightly unstable before dying completely...

For most people however, the life span reduction is no biggy as they would have changed their main pc anyway by the time it has depreciated.
 
Thanks for the reply people, shame no one really knows, not even the manufactures :(

Another question then...

CPU's are digital correct? On or off, they use electricity and transistors.

If one of the millions of transistors fails, can the CPU re-route its code so that it doesn't use that transistor anymore. Another words, can a CPU degrade over time, or if something goes inside a CPU, such as a transistor, does it just die. Is a CPU either on or off, or does it degrade in performance etc?

Thanks.
 
I wouldn't worry about it. If we kept under 1.31 VCore then it won't affect any i7 cpu processor. I believe it can go on for 10 years for temperature of under 85C.
 
Only time I have killed any PC component through overclocking was with a Phase Change system (prometeia) where I got condensation in the hermetic cell.

My own fault, killed the mobo, not the cpu, changed the mobo, all was fine, and properly sealed afterwards.
 
Not sure, but isn't the TJ Max of a CPU it's rated temperature for roughly 5 years of 24/7 operation? Can't remember for the life of me where I read it, or whether it's true, but I got it from somewhere.
 
pendy said:
I think cpus are probably the most reliable part of a pc.
Click to expand...

definately i would say, all parts seem to fail every now and again except processors, but then i must say componant failure as a whole is pretty rare, mostly because of how precisely these things are made and the amount of care that goes into assembling them, etc :p
 
They're made to last long enough. Yes they're digital, but they don't reroute code (?). They're complicated, and good odds that intel doesn't fully understand why they work. I don't even know where to start on that one, it's not like a circuit with wires so much as a block of directed electric fields. AMD processors occasionally continue working just fine with pins missing, processors that can no longer hold their overclock but function fine at stock speeds seem common.

I can't tell you how long cpu's are made to last for. The question doesn't make sense. They're designed to last at least 3 years because this is their warranty, but the variation in how long they actually last will be considerable. There is a relatively large amount of variation in the manufacturing process, as demonstrated by the various vids and overclocks each chip reach.

Blacks equation is a fairly good starting point if you want to try to be analytical about it, with luck death looms will turn up in this thread. It'll certainly live longer if you keep it cold, that lifespan depends on temperature is part of why your question doesn't makes sense.

Perhaps 'how long does a e8400 running at 1.35V, with a vid of 1.1V, at a temperature of 65 degrees, running at full load 24/7, generally live?' is a better question, but it's no more answerable than your one.
 
Last edited:
There's too many factors to answer this question, I think. I'd guess there's going to be variation between CPUs to start with. Then you have temperature and other operating conditions, voltage, the load upon the CPU, maybe even how clean its power supply is?

What can be said reasonably accurately is that temperature reduces CPU life, and overvolting reduces it faster. The effect of temperature you can control, and I'd bet that the average overclocked CPU on here is running cooler than your average Dell box. The effect of voltage, you can't do very much about.

The best evidence you're going to find is probably how rare it is for a modern CPU to die before it's replaced. These forums seem to go months without a CPU death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom