Overclocking Vs. Higher Boost Clock

[wpirobotbuilder]

On Intel CPUs the turbo boost feature allows the processor to go much faster than normal. Would there be any difference in performance between a traditional overclock and one where the boost clock was turned up to the same speed? Are there pros and cons for both?

[Kotobars]

I think there is a minor latency while switching from say 1500 MHz to boost 3.8GHz which is obviously making your PC slower, but i personally dont notice that much difference. I like that my the CPU undervolts itself while being on standby.

[Phalonx]

For me, there is no discernable latency when my 2500K switches between 1600 MHz and 4400 MHz.  The undervolting is certainly a great reason to just raise the boost frequency rather than keeping it at full frequency all the time - reduce temps and wear on the CPU when it is not in use.

[Bad2049]

I'd say a higher clock speed would be better. Here's something to think about... when TurboBoost (Intel)/TurboCore (AMD) kicks in it shuts down multiple cores while raising the clock speeds of the remaining cores. For me, I shut off TurboCore and OC'd 2.8GHz to 3.5GHz and this is on all 6 cores. On top of the clock speed increase I'm also passing the TurboCore Boosted speed of 3.3GHz for my 1055T cpu.