Dear Forum.
When one overclocks CPUs, are they doing so (in layman’s terms here), by limiting the maximum allowed power draw or is it setting a limit on the max allowable GHz.
If it is by limiting the power draw, and what you were working on is primarily single threaded on a given day, it would seem that you would still be able go (say for example only) to 4.8GHz. However, if you were working on something heavily threaded the next day that it would only go (again for example only) 3.8GHz. (or whatever it could get at the same set power draw as the single threaded @ 4.8GHz).
If overclocking is done via limiting GHz then it would seem you have to limited your overclock to the worst situation (in the example above, the 3.8GHz). This would be less desirable as it would seem you would have to limit your single threaded clock to the same 3.8GHz (or whatever the real-world clocks would allow depending on CPU, cooling, etc.).
I know this is over simplification at the greatest level
,Thank you for any insight you can provide in this regard.
When one overclocks CPUs, are they doing so (in layman’s terms here), by limiting the maximum allowed power draw or is it setting a limit on the max allowable GHz.
If it is by limiting the power draw, and what you were working on is primarily single threaded on a given day, it would seem that you would still be able go (say for example only) to 4.8GHz. However, if you were working on something heavily threaded the next day that it would only go (again for example only) 3.8GHz. (or whatever it could get at the same set power draw as the single threaded @ 4.8GHz).
If overclocking is done via limiting GHz then it would seem you have to limited your overclock to the worst situation (in the example above, the 3.8GHz). This would be less desirable as it would seem you would have to limit your single threaded clock to the same 3.8GHz (or whatever the real-world clocks would allow depending on CPU, cooling, etc.).
I know this is over simplification at the greatest level
