If you're just downloading etc overnight, the CPU won't be getting much use anyway so I can't imagine you'd have a problem, providing the overclock is stable in the first place.
Why? As several people have said, any deterioration over time still leaves a life-span of at least eight to ten years, at which point the CPU is so obsolete it probably won't run any recent software anyway. As I said, my record for an overclocked chip running 24/7 is four years, and in the end it was the motherboard that died (leaking capacitors) not the CPU. I've heard of five years plus as full speed.
3.15ghz 24/7 - all day/night folding with all 4 cores @ 100 load.
no hassles at all - could probably clock it higher but don't really have the time to test etc.
I think someone reckoned once that an overclocked pc generally reduces the lifespan of the cpu from 10 year to 7 years but since people upgrade 1/2/3 times a year it's not really anything to consider.
I've been running overclocked CPUs flat out with SETI and Folding@Home for a good 5-6 years and have never harmed a CPU through it. Just swapped out my E6300 which was OCed from 1.86 to 3.15 and ran F@H almost 24/7 for a year or so... it's still as good as the day I bought it. Now I'm doing the same with my Q6600.
Extra heat will cause electromigration quicker right? So by increasing the voltage, but reducing the heat, surely it is not going to make much difference?
My CPU is about 18mth old now and I have really hammered it, high overclocks and high temps, it loves it.
tried to kill it, but it wont have it, dont matter what I do to it.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.