Overclocking it self will not damage your hardware as long as you are able to keep your temperature down and dont give it too much voltage.

67 degree celsius still seems pretty high, and i would recommend that you either get some more fans or clock it down.

TheFreeloader

Keep in mind that this is in a Dell computer. It came at stock clock and fan speed. It IDLED at 65degrees GPU out of the box. Now I overclocked it slightly but also bumped up the fan speed so it Idles at 64 degrees overclocked. When under full load with out of the box settings it reached 80degrees, so in a way I have improved it.

Hey guys, I am sure some people have asked this before but I haven't seen any strait answers on the Web.

I have a Dell XPS410 with a 8800GTX. I have nTune and I am monitering the temps. The clock speed defaults to 575/900 but I like to overclock to 625/900. I view my overclock as modest but I understand that really high clock speeds can hurt lifespan. I need this gpu to last as long as possible because I am going to build my own computer before I go to college and my family is going to keep this one.

My question is if I keep the temperature down (67degrees C under full load at 100%fan speed) then will it have any effect on the lifespan of the GPU? Does pure frequency or temp or both shorten lifespan. I am only changing clock speeds in nTune and not modifying anything else like voltage.

Thanks for the help!

I believe Haze will.

:)

I actually made the mistake of getting 4gb of RAM for Vista 32-bit. My Rig is IntelCore2Duo @2.66GHz, 4gb RAM, 8800GTX.

What happened was all 768mb of VRAM in the Graphics Card got address spaces so there was no problem there. But I only got 3gb of RAM to use with the system while one gig sat useless. Luckily I go it from Dell. I complained enough so hey gave me $50 as reimbursment. (The only other option on the system configuration page for RAM was 2gb)

I would recommend gettin Vista 64-bit but right now as long as you have enough VRAM in your GPU I have never used more than 70% of my RAM playing a game and running several applications in the backround.

Does anyone else hink there should be a discount fr buying the a single game for multiple platforms? For example my boher preer to play on our Xbox 360 and I prefer the PC so why do we have to buy the game twice to get it on both platforms. As it ends up I usually just buy the Xbox 360 version and torrent the PC version, since I figure I have already paid the developers or a good game. There should be ome kind of progrm in order to get a discount, (like 80% or 90% off when getting a game for a duplicate platform.

Post your responses and thoughts.

Does anyoknow if Micro$oft gets royalties for any PC game written (for Windows)? Or do they just get royalties for the "Games or Windows" brand games?

Thanks!

You ought to know what I am talking about. Optical Discs (the distribution medium of choice) are generally unprotected from damage, such as scratches. So when you buy a game and you scratch it (or yor 360 randomly does, I think M$ does that intentionally) you have to buy the whole thing over again for the sticker price, which is paying for he content you already bought the right to use, instead of just a replacement. I understand optical discs with caraidges are more expensive (such as the first DVD-RAMs), but hat doen't have to be the answer. Why can't there be aggressive replacemnt progams where you sent in your old disc in order to get a new one with something like a $5 replacemnt fee. This should aply to movies and games. But no, they want to rip you off and make you buy a new copy. Companies are idiots because they are giving people justification to just pirate another copy wih their customer hostile practices. I understand Micro$oft has som kind of disc replacement program for a very limited
selection of titles (for $20 plus Shipping) and that is just ridiculous.

Post your thoughts and comments. Thanks

[QUOTE="redsnake9111"][QUOTE="c_smithii"][QUOTE="redsnake9111"]

Okay so the image is rendered in 720p and then is upscaled to 1080i/p. Thanks for the clarifications. So that means that all those M$ executives were lying when they said this would be the HD generation? I new it. There isn't enough power in these consoles to support a 180 resolution with all the new effects. So next generation will be the one with true 1080i/p rendering.

Thanks for the clarification.

BobHipJames

720p is high definition.

Sorry, I meant Full HD with the 1920 x 1080 resolution. 720p is still HD but it is not full HD.

"Full HD" refers to 1080p. It does not refer to 1080i, which, due to being interlaced, is actually of worse picture quality than 720p. Most PS3 games render natively in 720p and some can be upscaled to 1080p.

More Playstation 3 games render natively in 1080p than Xbox 360 games.

In fact, let us now ask the question of whether most Xbox 360 games actually render in 720p....there is currently only one game on the Playstation 3 that renders natively a sub-720p image, and that game is COD4....this game is also on the XBox 360.

The much-publicized Halo 3 also has an equally publicized fault...not rendering in native 720p, but being upscaled from a lower resolution. PGR3, 4 mirror this. There may be some other games that do this, but the interesting thing is that ALL Playstation 3 first party games render natively in at least 720p and some render natively in 1080p. No first-party Xbox 360 game renders natively in 1080p and some render in sub-720p resolutions.

For the most part, both consoles will render most games natively in either 720p or 1080i whereas the Xbox 360 is slightly more competent in upscaling to 1080p due to having a hardware upscaler built in....the PS3, meanwhile, has more games that render natively in 1080p.

Thank you for taking the time to give me a full explanation! I only have one question. What do you mean by sub-720p resolution? Do you mean 480p? Or something in between?

Thanks again for explaining everything. Also if you have any sources or articles on this I would like to read them.