Does underclocking prolong lifetime ?

[Edgar R. Zakarian]

. 

[Himommies]

probaly not

[ARikozuM]

Not in the slightest. 

[hconverse02]

Nope. In fact it might do the same as overclocking and turn you cpu into poop after so long.

[Spork829]

5 minutes ago, hconverse02 said:

Nope. In fact it might do the same as overclocking and turn you cpu into poop after so long.

Does this go for GPUs as well? That could be an issue for me...

[Godlygamer23]

Reducing the voltage itself will increase lifespan. Reducing the clock speed....not so much.

[hconverse02]

2 minutes ago, Spork829 said:

Does this go for GPUs as well? That could be an issue for me...

I mean don't know why you'd ever underclock but it could.

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Reducing the voltage itself will increase lifespan. Reducing the clock speed....not so much.

It will increase lifespan, but an irrelevant amount. Most CPUs should basically last forever (at least outlive their usefulness).

[AshleyAshes]

11 minutes ago, hconverse02 said:

Nope. In fact it might do the same as overclocking and turn you cpu into poop after so long.

You do realize that Intel's SpeedStep and AMD's Cool N' Quiet technologies both underclock the CPU to it's lowest possible multiplier when the CPU is idle... Right?  Literally, by engineered design, all modern CPUs, consumer or enterprise, underclock themselves.

[rattacko123]

If you are getting very high temperatures then it would probably make a difference.

Decreasing Voltage does generally increase lifespan (not by much though) because less damage to the material due to heat.

[hconverse02]

1 minute ago, AshleyAshes said:

You do realize that Intel's SpeedStep and AMD's Cool N' Quiet technologies both underclock the CPU to it's lowest possible multiplier when the CPU is idle... Right?  Literally, by design, all modern CPUs, consumer or enterprise, underclock as a matter of their engineered design.

Yeah but that's not what op is asking

[AshleyAshes]

1 minute ago, hconverse02 said:

Yeah but that's not what op is asking

Let's ignore what the OP is asking and focus on what you are saying.  You are saying 'it might do the same as overclocking and turn you cpu into poop after so long.' when this is entirely false because all CPUs underclock themselves to their lowest multiplier anyway.  The information you are giving here is false and I am pointing that out to prevent you from spreading your ignorance to others.

[hconverse02]

2 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Let's ignore what the OP is asking and focus on what you are saying.  You are saying 'it might do the same as overclocking and turn you cpu into poop after so long.' when this is entirely false because all CPUs underclock themselves to their lowest multiplier anyway.  The information you are giving here is false and I am pointing that out to prevent you from spreading your ignorance to others.

Key word "might" as in saying it could it could not. 

[Sniperfox47]

If you have a non-thermal-limited CPU like a 7700k and have a really really poor cooler, such that the CPU under load is hitting it's TDP-max and thermal throttling then in theory hard under clocking the CPU could increase lifetime of the CPU... But at that point just buy a better cooler.

[Godlygamer23]

15 minutes ago, hconverse02 said:

Nope. In fact it might do the same as overclocking and turn you cpu into poop after so long.

Underclocking will not reduce hardware lifespan. That would be nonsensical given that AMD and Intel already perform underclocking with their respective power saving tech.

[AshleyAshes]

Just now, hconverse02 said:

Key word "might" as in saying it could it could not. 

There is no 'could or could not'.  It's not 'Maybe' it's just 'No'.  Underclocking is harmless.  Again, because all current CPUs are underclocking anyway.

[Mooshi]

When cpus downclock themselves for light use, I don't see much advantage doing an underclock 24/7 tbh. Do you still use uour 1st pc? Probably not. 

[PianoPlayer88Key]

On at least one occasion, I've seen underclocking prolong a computer's per-session runtime.

 

Back in early 2008, before I built my first desktop PC (CPU was an Athlon 64 X2 4000+), my dad's desktop (with a 1.4 GHz Athlon, socket A I believe, bought early 2002) would shut down after a few minutes or so, hardly enough time to get anything done.  (I also wonder if the power supply could have been an issue too, it was not a well-regarded one, would probably have gotten 4 or 5 at best on a tier list or a 3 or 4 or lower score on JonnyGuru.)

 

I learned that by underclocking in the bios to 1 GHz (anything lower and it was unstable, iirc), I was able to get about a half hour or so at a time, before it'd shut down.  This was enough, between a few sessions or so, to be able to order the parts on Newegg for my then-new build.

[Money bagzsz]

Lowering the clock will not, but lowering the voltage will. However that only accounts for electromigration being the key reason your cpu dies, If it dies later down the line because of a bad psu, motherboard, powersurge, etc, which is much more likely, then undervolting it wouldn't have done anything but caused you to deal with a slower computer for however long it was before the thing that killed it.