4790k comfortable overclock question

[threebills11]

so heres my story,i wanted to ask for opinions on this.
I will put the build below to know everything,but this is the question.
I overclocked my 4790k to 4.6 ghz at 1.28 volts.....temps on game load are 62-68 cel...i know this to be acceptable being under 70 cel,but when i go down to 4.4 ghz at 1.18 volts my core temps are 52 - 58 cel.
Its a difference of 200 mghz(which i see no visual difference) and the card is oc'd running at 1396-1406 mhz(which stays 68-70).
I have plenty of fans for the ambient temp and the cpu cooler running med to moderate in both factions.
Guess my question is ...is it really that more detrimental to the chip running that 10 degrees hotter all the time?Im only getting 200 mhz more,and like i said i se no visual difference,and regular operations downloading and such i dont notice a difference....i think what it is,is i would rather run it higher just to "feel" like im getting the most out of the system...but i dont want to have a sufficiently larger amount of abuse/decreased life of the chip.
So,i would like to hear opinions! Thanks to all who take the time to reply! build below

intel 4790k
corsair h80i cooler
samsung 950 pro 500 gig M.2 slot(OS)
samsung 850 evo 250 gig
samsung 840 evo 250 gig
WD 1 terabyte HDD
ASUS STRIX 980 TI (OC edition)
EVGA supernova 850 watt gold PSU
NZXT switch 810 case
7 CORSAIR 120 MM FANS(3 EXHAUST,2 COOLER EXHAUST)
1 140MM CORSAIR(INTAKE)

 

[dudmont]

how long does this comp need to last you?

 

[dudmont]

If you answer my question, then you'll have the answer you need. With electronics, temps shorten life. Simple as that.

 

[dudmont]

PS I run my 4790k very conservatively. 1.16 volts 4.3(4cores), 4.4(3 cores), 4.5(2 cores). 4.5 cache clock. Really simple, really quiet, and really cool.

 

[joex444]

One thing to keep in mind is that the power used by a CPU is roughly proportional to frequency and to the square of voltage. What that means is if the 4.0GHz stock setting is at 1.17V (and the stock voltage varies a lot among chips), and it runs at the TDP of 84W then at 4.4GHz and 1.18V it should be 84 * 4.4 * 1.18 * 1.18 / (4.0 * 1.17 * 1.17) = 94W... only +10W, so it should be a small temperature rise. Now at 4.6GHz and 1.28V we repeat that calculation and see it's 116W or +32W or 38% more heat.

The key to this is the voltage squared behavior, so the simplest thing to suggest would be to simply run at the highest stable speed you can under 1.20V. Trying to run at 200MHz more, a level you said yourself doesn't cause any noticeable improvement, but jumping up in voltage so it uses an extra ~30W means its pulling in a lot more current (~90A at 4.6GHz, ~80A at 4.4GHz, and ~70A at 4.0GHz -- yes, those are very high currents for normal applications but that's how CPUs work).

Effectively even at 4.6GHz, that CPU can probably survive much longer than you'd want to keep the system. At 4.6GHz you're talking about a 600MHz OC. I'm running a 600MHz OC on a 2.4GHz chip I bought in 2008 (Q6600) - that's over 7 years at this point and represents a much higher percentage overclock (25% vs 15%).

 

[Anders235]

It shouldn't affect the life of your chip either way if the temps are kept below 70 degrees.

People 'feel' like running it 'cool' *should* make your chip last longer. And while feelings are great and all, they're not facts. Of course when you say that then people spout off about electron migration which is kind of the overclocking version of Godwin's law.

YMMV etc.

 

[threebills11]

Thank you all for the replies.As for the life of the comp i was hoping to get at least 5 years out of it.It seems that running it at mid 60s cel temp all the time wouldnt be as bad as i thought it would.Think ill just keep it at the 4.6 ghz.Thanks again for all the info,very much appreciated!