Quote Originally Posted by Sam DeathWalker View Post
I agree that the 920 is the best bang / buck for sure.

If you are stable at the higher speed then thats great, I really prefer stable systems to OC systems.

But because the cpu is almost never the bottleneck in wow (of course more cpu speed is good for other applications), I don't see much reason to overclock for wow. But if its stable then you have nothing to lose (ya your cpu might wear out in 5 years instead of 10 .... big deal).
Ever hear of stress testing?
I really prefer stable systems to OC systems.
So you mean you prefer stock stable systems to potentially unstable OC systems? That's what stress testing is for. You test your system to the extreme to find if it's stable JUST so instability doesn't come up during normal use. World of Warcraft, even five instances doesn't create a bottleneck, but overclocking can create more headroom for other applications.

As far as system life degradation from overclocking it's implied but UNPROVEN (far as I know). Think about the binning process. You have 25 chips from one wafer. 17 of those chips are binned as 920 chips based on how they perform compared to various specs. 3 are binned as 950s, and 5 are binned as 965s.

25 chips, all from the same wafer, with some of them sold as different sub-chips.

Overclocking involves: running at higher than stock speeds and voltages. Not much else. Even IF overclocking could be proven to reduce processor life by even 50% (BULLSHIT), then, say that chip with a 10 year life would be reduced to 5 years. In five years there could be two new generations of processors out, along with motherboard chipsets, and 3-5 new generations of graphics cards. Assuming your system stays static, five years is a great lifetime for a system.