What Difference Does GHz Really Make in a CPU?

[Smexy Potato]

Hi.

 

I've seen people doing some crazy overclocks with their Devil's Canyon CPU's. I myself only game and do a bit of video/image editing. I'm actually getting a Devil's Canyon CPU soon, probably a 4790K. I was just wondering if the clock of the CPU really helps that much. I really don't pay much attention to the stock clock anyways, as long as it's at least 3.5GHz then it's fine to me. So does say 4.5GHz really make a huge performance difference or does it just help in other computing tasks?

[Samsterstorm]

Hi.

 

I've seen people doing some crazy overclocks with their Devil's Canyon CPU's. I myself only game and do a bit of video/image editing. I'm actually getting a Devil's Canyon CPU soon, probably a 4770K. I was just wondering if the clock of the CPU really helps that much. I really don't pay much attention to the stock clock anyways, as long as it's at least 3.5GHz then it's fine to me. So does say 4.5GHz really make a huge performance difference or does it just help in other computing tasks?

A 4770k is not a devils canyon mate! u mean 4790k 

[C0LL0SS0S]

first, the 4770k isn't a devils canyon, 

second GHz is not that important but you will feel the difference between 3.5 and 4.5GHz but most likely in games or benchmarks

[Smexy Potato]

A 4770k is not a devils canyon mate! u mean 4790k 

 

Ah, sorry. It's late and this just popped into my mind. I get confused with these names.

[Stefken89]

"Processors work according to a clock that beats a set number of times per second, usually measured in gigahertz. For instance, a 3.1-GHz processor has a clock that beats 3.1 billion times per second. Each clock beat represents an opportunity for the processor to manipulate a number of bits equivalent to its capacity -- 64-bit processors can work on 64 bits at a time"

 

So if you overclock a CPU from 3.5GHz to 4.5GHz, you effectively increased the number of times per second a CPU can manipulate a number of bits by 28,6%. 

Depending on the task the CPU has to perform this can mean that the CPU can handle it up to 28,6% faster. 

 

So I would say it does make a difference. 

 

Keep in mind that this is a really simple explanation, and much more comes into play than this...

[Smexy Potato]

first, the 4770k isn't a devils canyon, 

second GHz is not that important but you will feel the difference between 3.5 and 4.5GHz but most likely in games or benchmarks

Ah. Well I guess it's worth trying myself. I suppose that I'll post benchmarks when I do it.

[Nup]

here are some number form Bit-tech results. 

 

with an increase of 1.2 Ghz (3.5 to 4.7) on their 4770k these are the results they got; 

 

Gump; +15%

Handbrake: +20%

Cinebench 11.5: +20%

Skyrim (with hd textures): +42% (this one really surprised me) 

Shogun 2: +20%

 

So yes, OCing does get very tangible tasks. (note these games are more cpu intensive then the likes of others, usually the increase isn't so big). 

[Smexy Potato]

"Processors work according to a clock that beats a set number of times per second, usually measured in gigahertz. For instance, a 3.1-GHz processor has a clock that beats 3.1 billion times per second. Each clock beat represents an opportunity for the processor to manipulate a number of bits equivalent to its capacity -- 64-bit processors can work on 64 bits at a time"

 

So if you overclock a CPU from 3.5GHz to 4.5GHz, you effectively increased the number of times per second a CPU can manipulate a number of bits by 28,6%. 

Depending on the task the CPU has to perform this can mean that the CPU can handle it up to 28,6% faster. 

 

So I would say it does make a difference. 

 

Keep in mind that this is a really simple explanation, and much more comes into play then this...

 

Ah. I'd assume power consumption and cooling is also a factor?

[Smexy Potato]

here are some number form Bit-tech results. 

 

with an increase of 1.2 Ghz (3.5 to 4.7) on their 4770k these are the results they got; 

 

Gump; +15%

Handbrake: +20%

Cinebench 11.5: +20%

Skyrim (with hd textures): +42% (this one really surprised me) 

Shogun 2: +20%

 

So yes, OCing does get very tangible tasks. (note these games are more cpu intensive then the likes of others, usually the increase isn't so big). 

 

Wow. I've actually been doing another Skyrim playthrough, heavily modded of course, and if the gain is 42%, then I guess Bethesda did a better job optimizing the game that we think. Of course, this all depends on my configuration and how lucky I get though.

[Nup]

Wow. I've actually been doing another Skyrim playthrough, heavily modded of course, and if the gain is 42%, then I guess Bethesda did a better job optimizing the game that we think. Of course, this all depends on my configuration and how lucky I get though.

 

Bare in mind this just one example, their test was just running in a line, more or less. They had no mods, either. But an oc can do nothing but help. 

 

But a gain is a gain no less  

[Stefken89]

Ah. I'd assume power consumption and cooling is also a factor?

 

Power consumption not really. You would be hitting temperature caps before you hit power consumption caps.

The temperature will increase significantly, because you will need to give the cpu more voltage to be able to reach a higher clockspeed. 

Keep in mind that higher temps will decrease the lifespan of the cpu, so better cooling is required to reach higher overclocks.

 

What I ment with more comes into play was that processors are more complicated than the explanation I just gave. You can't compare one CPU to another, just comparing the clockspeeds.

[Oshino Shinobu]

Wow. I've actually been doing another Skyrim playthrough, heavily modded of course, and if the gain is 42%, then I guess Bethesda did a better job optimizing the game that we think. Of course, this all depends on my configuration and how lucky I get though.

It can get to a point where it's just too much for a system. Or the game engine itself. If I try to run my Skyrim maxed out with the ENB on at 4K I get around 12 FPS max (with 2x Titan Blacks and 4.5GHz 3770K) 

 

It can eat up over 5GB vRAM too. 

[slightlyjaded]

Clock speed is nice, but ti's really number of operations per second. A single core 5 GHz rig is going to look impressive, but it's probably going to get wrecked by a 8 core 3 GHz rig.

 

No that 8 core rig isn't going to operate at an effective 24 GHz, very few programs support multi core operations, and even then you run into the same problems as SLi scaling, unless you're running a program that has integrated support for SLI/Xfire

[gnarly0531]

well from 3.5 to 4.5 there are 1,000,000,000 more calculations a second, there will be some difference. obviously this would be under perfect circumstances ie. no wait states.

[Smexy Potato]

Quite the contrary.

Yeah, it's Bethesda, what am I saying?

[GoldSrc]

Apart from frequency, architecture and cache size are also important factors to take into consideration.

A 3GHz Core i7 will beat a 3GHz Pentium 4.