Page 1 of 9 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 125
  1. #1
    Joined
    May 2005
    Location
    Greenfield, Wisconsin
    Age
    30
    Posts
    702

    CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    I heard about burning in CPU's a long time ago, but latley its been comming up more and more. My question is, what does burning in a CPU actualy do? (i mean physicaly) also, how much of a gain is usualy found? I know every proc is different, but do people usualy see around 50mhz gain, or is it even less than that? Why do you have to burn in your proc right when you get it? Wouldnt a proc "burn in" natrualy over time, because I've never seen any gain after using my proc for a while? What is the "proper" way to burn in a CPU? Overclock moderatly and then prime test? Do I burn in more than once? How do you know when your proc is fully burned in.

    Also, to see if burning in actualy has any effect, would I have to test max overclock, then burn in and then retest oc? Also, how do you know that burning in isnt simply a myth, because I mean if you burn in for 24hours then retry your overclock, your room temp could be different, and on air or water, it is pretty easy to get a few extra mhz from a lower ambient.
    EVGA 790i Ultra
    Intel 9550 @ 3.922ghz 1.2125v
    ATI 4870x2
    OCZ 2x2gb @ DDR1600 7-6-6-21 @ 1.9v
    OCZ Game Xstream 700w
    4x80gb WD Sata2 in Raid 0
    40" Samsung 4071 @ 1080p
    Custom Waterloop on CPU and Video
    Thermaltake Tsunami case (Black)
    7 Ultimate 64-bit

  2. #2
    Joined
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Music City, TN
    Age
    63
    Posts
    361

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    My $.02 worth.....

    I think it is pretty much a urban myth. Sure, running things hot might help thermal paste settle in, parts to fit together better, etc. I have read several discussions on the "theory" and I don't buy the idea that electronics get better with stress/age. Consider...if burn in worked wouldn't you be able to keep getting better and better clocks the more you stressed your system. Surely there isn't a limit to electromigration and molecular alignment and pathway optimization and yada yada.
    Shouldn't my old XP 1700+ (11X200) reach 3 Ghz by now?!

    CoachB

    DFI Ultra II-M2, AM2 x2 5200+

  3. #3
    Joined
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    6,871

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    it can't hurt...so why not try it!!!

  4. #4
    Joined
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vvardenfell
    Age
    57
    Posts
    10,843

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    Put me solidly in the "myth" camp. I've seen numerous variations on the "burn-in helped me" story, but in every case something else changed during the burn-in time: new BIOS, reloaded OS, better cooling (no really - one person claimed burn-in was a success and eventually admitted that he had installed water-cooling after the initial benchmarking) etc.

    Until someone can find a theory that sounds plausable, AND the effect can be properly reproduced, it's junk science.


    M

  5. #5
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,238

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    I think your reffering to the thermal interface rather than the CPU

    AFAIK you can 'burn in' the thermal interface between a CPU and the cooler - it becomes more efficient at transferring heat as time passes

    Better heat transfer usually allows for better overclocks

    FX-55, 2GB, 8800GTX (650/1000MHz) @ 1600x1200 NATIVE
    3WARE PCIE 9650SE-2LP --> RAPTOR 150GBx2/RAID0

  6. #6
    Joined
    May 2005
    Location
    Greenfield, Wisconsin
    Age
    30
    Posts
    702

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    Yea, thats what I kind of figured. Some one says "hey if you run prime95 for 72 hours straight, you will overclock better!" Then some one less experienced, aka a noob if you will, "burns in" their CPU and somehow gets a better overclock. So I think id have to aggree with Meridian, alot of people don't take the smallest things into consideration when overclocking and think that an increase in frequency is caused by something they heard on a forum. The thing that gets me though is, people don't just refer to it as "burning in", ive also heard the term stretching the CPU assosiated with the burn in proccess. So, there must be some type of science involved with it, but weather it works or "should, in theroey work" is the question. Also, if you take a look at the "BIG" overclockers, IE:7.2-7.5ghz or 4-4.6ghz, not once have I heard a single one mention anything about a burn in period. So going on the assumption that these big overclockers have at least the slightest knowledge of how overclocking works, and some of the physical properties of our proccessors, and not one has mentioned anything about burning in, I will declare the burn in proccess a MYTH (and yes, i do know what they say about people who assume things. )

    Although, if any one has proof, from a reliable sorce that the burn in proccess is infact real, then please do feel free to share it with me.


    When I first started overclocking, I thought it was mearly just increase FSB, slap a better Heatsink on it and go; but I now realize how much of a science it is. There are so many different variables (which I don't think anyone can account for all of them.) that can affect your results. The biggest problems though, arise when you do something, weather it be change thermal paste, or increase the voltage and you find you are able to increase the frequency, but don't neccessarily take into consideration of the smaller things that could infact be the true reason behind your success. This often leads to rumors that have people doing crazy things to their machines. Also, say Joe-smoe thinks he is burning in his proccessor, and somehow gets an increase in frequency. So what does he do? He goes and posts on his favorite forum about his success with burning in his proccessor. Then more people try it, and some others somehow get lucky and get an increase, and they post; the only problem here is this: what about the people that DON'T have any success? Do they post about it : Probaly not. So basicaly what you end up with is this; a thread full of success stories, with maybe one of two of the people kind enough to admit they had no success what so ever. Then those people are often thought of as noobs, and people just think they don't know what they are doing.




    PS: (and yes, i do know what they say about people who assume things. )
    EVGA 790i Ultra
    Intel 9550 @ 3.922ghz 1.2125v
    ATI 4870x2
    OCZ 2x2gb @ DDR1600 7-6-6-21 @ 1.9v
    OCZ Game Xstream 700w
    4x80gb WD Sata2 in Raid 0
    40" Samsung 4071 @ 1080p
    Custom Waterloop on CPU and Video
    Thermaltake Tsunami case (Black)
    7 Ultimate 64-bit

  7. #7
    Joined
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Northern UT
    Age
    67
    Posts
    4,506

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    I've always questioned burning in as well. But interestingly, I've been able to very slowly OC my 3500 on my soltek mobo. To make a long story short, I've been able to go from htt of 220 to 230 in small steps (my goal is 236) and run prime95 stable with only a minor bump in vcore (bumping vcore, chaning memory settings, any such adjustments initially made no difference, with prime95 always failing), so something has "burned in" so to speak over time. But I'm talking two months of running it at a htt of 220, and then bumps of 2htt every other week for the past two months. Not the usual "burning in" over a weekend of constant torture and stress.

    Marty
    Gigabyte P55A-UD4P, Core i7-860 Lynnfield at 3.6GHz, ZALMAN CNPS10X QUIET 120mmCPU HSF, CORSAIR Vengeance (2 x 4GB) DDR3 at 1640, PowerColor HD5870, Earthworks 650W PSU, Samsung 840 EVO 120g SSD (W10 Pro 64-bit), 320G Blue Caviar storage, LiteOn DVD burner, Antec 902 case [B]
    ASRock Z68 Extreme3, i5 2500K OCed at 4.5GHz, CM 212 Hyper Plus, G. Skill Ripjaws 4G X 2 2133 Ram, Samsung 840 EVO 250G, 3Tb Seagate HDD, unknown DVD drive, XFX Double D Radeon HD 7870, PC Power and Cooling 610 Silencer, Fractal Define R4 Case, LG 27" AOC IPS monitor, Win 10 Home 64-bit

  8. #8
    Joined
    May 2005
    Location
    Greenfield, Wisconsin
    Age
    30
    Posts
    702

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    Through this proccess, nothing has changed? Months, hell days is alot of time for nothing in your system to change. Did you, measure temps of the room? Just turn the computer on (with out internet connectivity) "burn in" then shut off and test results? Or did you use your computer casualy, made some updates, played some games, went through season changes..... These are the little things im talking about. Im sure your overclock did increase, im not doubting that one bit, but seeing as though you did this over months, im sure the weather changed; and unless you have a house that can maintain an exact temperature, give or take 1C, then you cant weed out the chance of aimbient temperature being a factor.



    What makes me sick is, people like "Mr." Sean Kon. He supports and activly suggests burning in your proccessor, with out giving the slightest bit of proof, other then "Sure guys it works! I created the frickin OC bible, i know what im talking about! I got 100 extra mhz! woohoo, im a frickin moron!"

    His brainwashing in progress!

    Once again, I could be horribly wrong about the whole thing, the burn in proccess could actauly work, but based on lack of credible evidence, my opinion stays the same.. the burn in proccess is a myth, nothing more, nothing less.
    EVGA 790i Ultra
    Intel 9550 @ 3.922ghz 1.2125v
    ATI 4870x2
    OCZ 2x2gb @ DDR1600 7-6-6-21 @ 1.9v
    OCZ Game Xstream 700w
    4x80gb WD Sata2 in Raid 0
    40" Samsung 4071 @ 1080p
    Custom Waterloop on CPU and Video
    Thermaltake Tsunami case (Black)
    7 Ultimate 64-bit

  9. #9
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,238

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    Electronic circuits are either on or off and the material they are made of has a frequency range within which they can hold a signal that, AFAIK, does not change with time

    Put that reasoning to him and see what he says....


    FX-55, 2GB, 8800GTX (650/1000MHz) @ 1600x1200 NATIVE
    3WARE PCIE 9650SE-2LP --> RAPTOR 150GBx2/RAID0

  10. #10
    Joined
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Oak Creek, WI (Milwaukee)
    Age
    34
    Posts
    853

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    I read some of the stuff that guys says, and some of it sounds good, and some of it sounds like complete BS.

  11. #11
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Age
    70
    Posts
    64,554

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    I don't buy it either. Most engineers will tell ya the same...

  12. #12
    Joined
    May 2005
    Location
    Greenfield, Wisconsin
    Age
    30
    Posts
    702

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    Yea, theres something that I don't like about that guy, maybe its how everytime I seen anything related to him, I also see 1,000,000 things in the post about the OC bible, or maybe its how 75% of the stuff he posts seems like 100% BS. Like the overclock calculator or w/e it is called. I can't comment on weather or not there is a direct correlation between voltage applied and overclock results, but from what I've read, the higher the frequency, the more the voltage leaks. Which I would imagine, throws any thoughts of direct correlation out the window, ultimitly making his program obsolete (for my useage.)

    Heh, I think he talks so much BS because no one ever tells him he's wrong. When ever I see a post by him, theres always a bunch of newer overclockers stating how good the oc bible is, or how much more of an overclock burning in their CPU got them. There's never an experienced OC'er to say "Hey... you are wrong. Don't ever post again."
    EVGA 790i Ultra
    Intel 9550 @ 3.922ghz 1.2125v
    ATI 4870x2
    OCZ 2x2gb @ DDR1600 7-6-6-21 @ 1.9v
    OCZ Game Xstream 700w
    4x80gb WD Sata2 in Raid 0
    40" Samsung 4071 @ 1080p
    Custom Waterloop on CPU and Video
    Thermaltake Tsunami case (Black)
    7 Ultimate 64-bit

  13. #13
    Joined
    May 2003
    Location
    Rhode Island, USA
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,940

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    I burned in my Opty.

    Installed it and went to 10x270. It worked so I went to 10x290 for 2 days then 10x300.

    Burned that sucker right in.

    Bill
    My HTPC

    ASRock 970 Extreme3
    AMD FX-4100 w/Coolermaster GeminII S cooler
    M Station HT-1100 HTPC Media Center case
    Antec 480 NeoPower PSU
    Kingston HyperX Blu 8GB KHX1600C9D3B1K2/8GX
    Gigabyte GV-R467ZL 4670/1GB video card
    Hitachi HDS721050CLA362 500GB SATA hd
    Windows7 Ultimate x64 & Ubuntu 12.04 LTS (partitioned)
    Pioneer DVR-215D SATA DVD burner
    Samsung 40" 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV LN40C630


    You can teach an old dog; it just takes longer.

  14. #14
    Joined
    May 2005
    Location
    Greenfield, Wisconsin
    Age
    30
    Posts
    702

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    Oh man, now you done it. I have to highjack my own thread. What stepping is the opty??????
    EVGA 790i Ultra
    Intel 9550 @ 3.922ghz 1.2125v
    ATI 4870x2
    OCZ 2x2gb @ DDR1600 7-6-6-21 @ 1.9v
    OCZ Game Xstream 700w
    4x80gb WD Sata2 in Raid 0
    40" Samsung 4071 @ 1080p
    Custom Waterloop on CPU and Video
    Thermaltake Tsunami case (Black)
    7 Ultimate 64-bit

  15. #15
    Joined
    May 2003
    Location
    Rhode Island, USA
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,940

    Re: CPU burn in, myth or reality?

    CABYE 0540FPAW.
    Its in a thread you posted in.
    At 1.47 Vcore too.
    My HTPC

    ASRock 970 Extreme3
    AMD FX-4100 w/Coolermaster GeminII S cooler
    M Station HT-1100 HTPC Media Center case
    Antec 480 NeoPower PSU
    Kingston HyperX Blu 8GB KHX1600C9D3B1K2/8GX
    Gigabyte GV-R467ZL 4670/1GB video card
    Hitachi HDS721050CLA362 500GB SATA hd
    Windows7 Ultimate x64 & Ubuntu 12.04 LTS (partitioned)
    Pioneer DVR-215D SATA DVD burner
    Samsung 40" 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV LN40C630


    You can teach an old dog; it just takes longer.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •