Hacker News Reader

Comment by protastus | Hacker News Reader

In the old days that would be true but nowadays OC is so mainstream that temperature sensors are expected to keep the SoC within safe limits, shutting down if needed but preventing damage.

Something escaped design models and test scenarios for this to happen with end users.

View on HN

> In the old days that would be true but nowadays OC is so mainstream

I do not agree with this statement. If anything, overclocking is less prevalent than ever before, despite what all of the LTT's and friends make videos about.

The reality is modern CPU's are crazy fast, and auto-overclock (boost/burst) all on their own. There's little reason to push the CPU's further - and more significant gains can be had much safer by upgrading CPU generations than squeezing out a few extra percent of performance in benchmarks.

There will always be enthusiasts that want to overclock - but I don't think we can consider overclocking mainstream.

LTT has repeatedly said that overclocking under normal circumstances has been worth less and less as GPUs and CPUs have been increasingly built to ride thermal and power limits at stock. And that overclocking can even hurt performance by disabling that behavior.

For CPU clock, I agree the gains are marginal, yet BIOS settings still allow the end user to trivially further bump up the clock. There are young people with a lot of time on their hands who will do it for that 3% uplift.

Further, with memory we have things like XMP which again are blessed by the vendors and are 100% within the definition of overclocking. Just because a memory module can run at XMP rates doesn't mean the motherboard or the CPU have the signal integrity or power integrity margins to support the timings. And this is something component vendors can't optimize from the factory (only system vendors can), because it depends on multiple parts.

In the old days one couldn't enter BIOS setup and find even a single mention of overclocking, and the term itself was taboo because it meant operating the system outside the design spec. Nowadays a lot of vendors use OC in marketing. I think this alone makes my point about being mainstream.

In a way, OC is absolutely mainstream now. It's now integrated into the product itself, which dynamically clocks itself depending on thermal headroom.

There's thus minimal need for users to do any manual overclocking any more.

This doesn't sound like a thermal issue with the chip itself though, more in the physical socket.

In the article it said that apparently in some cases excess voltage damaged the temperature sensor which caused chip to not register overheating and just ask VRM for more power

Sounds like the thermal sensors don’t fail safe. If the thermal sensor isn’t returning readings or those readings are not within a reasonable range the CPU should shut down and then fail subsequent POST tests with a descriptive error.

Overvolting can do funny stuff to electronics. It could "just" go out of spec and start lying by some degrees.

I wouldn't be surprised if next gen had that duplicated, it can't cost that many extra transistors

Reply on news.ycombinator.com