Will my computer be able to run Diablo 3?

[WhiteNinjaHero]

I know that requirements aren't out yet, but what do you think?

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 x2 2.7GHz (7750 model)
Graphics Card: ATI Radeon 4670 512 MB
RAM: 4 GB of 1066
Motherboard: M3N78 Pro

Thats the important stuff, thanks alot to whoever gives me an answer!

[Risingred]

http://files.filefront.com/Sacred+2+Fallen+Angel+English+Demo/;11927753;/fileinfo.html

If you can run that well, then I doubt you'd have much of a problem. The only matter is HOW well you can run it, but time will tell on that.

[Krugar]

I know that requirements aren't out yet [...] Thats the important stuff, thanks alot to whoever gives me an answer!

That's my answer.

[WhiteNinjaHero]

http://files.filefront.com/Sacred+2+Fallen+Angel+English+Demo/;11927753;/fileinfo.html

If you can run that well, then I doubt you'd have much of a problem. The only matter is HOW well you can run it, but time will tell on that.


I could run the demo at high settings without the FPS dropping below 20. Im guessing this is good enough?

[Akse]

Just wait for the requirements.. if your system doesn't meet them.. then you probably have to upgrade your computer (which at that time is the right thing to do since 1-2 years from now it will be a lot cheaper)

[Risingred]

I could run the demo at high settings without the FPS dropping below 20. Im guessing this is good enough?

That's my guess. Just a guess, though.
20fps isn't that great but Sacred 2 doesn't run very well to begin with.
The other poster said to wait until you get the game to upgrade, which doesn't make sense to me. The only thing I'd really change around at all is maybe a beefier graphics card at some point in the future. You should be good for a while.

[mouseman]

Didn't they say something about that they are trying to make the game work with broad range of computers? If I recall correctly, they said you'd be able to play the game with today's top computers no problem.

[SlechtWeerBeer]

Didn't they say something about that they are trying to make the game work with broad range of computers? If I recall correctly, they said you'd be able to play the game with today's top computers no problem.

Only thing I recalled is SC2 being a decent guideline for the time being. I bet today's high-end computers run SC2 with ease. Mid-range is where the market is, so that's what they aim for.

[WhiteNinjaHero]

Hopefully I can run it with my current comp, but when it comes out if I need to upgrade my videocard then I can do so.

[Lazarus II]

You won't have a problem. I'm sure the requirements will be lower than that.

[sreda]

I know that requirements aren't out yet, but what do you think?

Processor: AMD Athlon 64 x2 2.7GHz (7750 model)
Graphics Card: ATI Radeon 4670 512 MB
RAM: 4 GB of 1066
Motherboard: M3N78 Pro

Thats the important stuff, thanks alot to whoever gives me an answer!

You're computer will be able to run it fine, just not on max settings. Well you could run it on max, but you'll get low framerates like around 30 and under, particularly in big fights. This is all speculation, the specs for the computers at the Blizzcon demos were said to have been insane, and videos of it were uploaded on youtube which is against Blizzards ruling. But there are videos of people playing the game on there.

If your computer is 3 years old or more, and if it could run any game at the time you bought it, then you're fine. An 8800 could run this game quite decently. You don't have to play the game to know what kind of computer it's going to take, just by looking at it, it seems like a glorified version of Baldur's Gate. Except a lot better.

[psyadam]

Hey guys, I am looking to buy a new computer for Diablo 3 playing--does anyone have a good deal/suggestion for what to get? I know someone mentioned some kind of deal on Intel's website but he hasn't gotten back to me even though I messaged him.

[Risingred]

Hey guys, I am looking to buy a new computer for Diablo 3 playing--does anyone have a good deal/suggestion for what to get? I know someone mentioned some kind of deal on Intel's website but he hasn't gotten back to me even though I messaged him.

I have replied to every private message I got. :p

[GuardianHadriel]

instead of AMD and ATi switch to Intel and Nvidia(maybe intel core i7 and Nvidia 280gtx)

[Risingred]

instead of AMD and ATi switch to Intel and Nvidia(maybe intel core i7 and Nvidia 280gtx)

That would be going from a dual core to a new-gen quad core. Those boards require high PSU wattage and DDR3 RAM. It's not cheap.

[Kentalicious]

no dude you need a brand new computer with a quad core at least 3gh so you might have to overclock and a graphics card that will support direct x10

... but seriously about any computer will be able to run diablo 3 they said they are not trying to make a game for high end computers they want as much people to play this as they can

[Risingred]

... but seriously about any computer will be able to run diablo 3

http://www.genoafoursquare.org/2006_UTurn/old_mac512.jpg

??

There's a difference being able to run a program, and enjoying the way a program is ran. We'll see when SC2 beta is out since they are similar in resources.

[Kentalicious]

i said about.. lol

[PReP]

I would reason that speculations that are more in detail, about what will be needed to run diablo 3 is quite futile at the moment.
Patience :)

[Risingred]

I would reason that speculations that are more in detail, about what will be needed to run diablo 3 is quite futile at the moment.
Patience :)

Well, it's generally assumed that you'll need at least a low-end dual core machine to run it semi-decently.
It's not as much guess-work as it is simply knowing what the game uses and how those functions use resources, and comparing it to similar games.

[mordred]

Wait until the game launches...And do not switch to nvidia or intel...!

[PReP]

Well, it's generally assumed that you'll need at least a low-end dual core machine to run it semi-decently.
It's not as much guess-work as it is simply knowing what the game uses and how those functions use resources, and comparing it to similar games.

But that is the thing, we _don't_ know what the game "uses" for the moment.

We don't know how it will be accelerated, what graphic api it will use (dx9/dx10/gl), how it will scale, or anything.
Anyone other than someone working with the code/game could make a guess at this point.

And one can't watch videos or a pre-alpha demonstration and "guesstimate" how taxing the game will be on the hardware, not for quite some time yet :)

All we know is that they have said, and in the past, made games that does not need the newest highest end gear (wherever we will be in tech when it get released).

[Risingred]

We don't know how it will be accelerated, what graphic api it will use (dx9/dx10/gl), how it will scale, or anything.

It uses DX9. They have no plans currently for any kind of DX10 support, like the rest of the industry. It uses the havok engine. There will very likely be toggles for all kinds of graphical effects. You can obviously see the dynamic lighting and shadows. They've released what hardware they use for demos at blizzcon (although technically not on purpose) and we can also assume that the engine is going to be polished up nicely for release.

We know of other games that use the same features, namely starcraft 2. Yes, you can guesstimate this. SC2 was guesstimated almost exactly before the specs were released. But a guess is just a guess and I'm not saying that I somehow know what the exact specs are going to be...just a broad overview of what is likely to play the game at a stable, "nice-looking" level.

I say dual core not because the game is going to take advantage of threading or even multiple cores. I have no idea if it will but that's irrelevant. I'm talking more about the types of RAM and the FSB/clock speeds on the 680i+ boards that you generally stick a dual core processor into.

All we know is that they have said, and in the past, made games that does not need the newest highest end gear (wherever we will be in tech when it get released).

Certainly. And again, it isn't like I'm a precog and I can see into the future. It's just an educated guess.

Wait until the game launches...And do not switch to nvidia or intel...!

Why?

[SlechtWeerBeer]

It uses DX9. They have no plans currently for any kind of DX10 support, like the rest of the industry.

Plenty modern games have DX10 support.

[Risingred]

Plenty modern games have DX10 support.

I am not aware of a single game coded natively in DX10. If you can play it in XP it is not a DX10 game. They add in an effect, and then slap a sticker on the box proclaiming that it "supports DX10" which makes no sense and is all marketing.

[SlechtWeerBeer]

I am not aware of a single game coded natively in DX10. If you can play it in XP it is not a DX10 game. They add in an effect, and then slap a sticker on the box proclaiming that it "supports DX10" which makes no sense and is all marketing.

If you can play it on XP, you run it under DX9; that doesn't mean the game cannot run under DX10.
Far Cry 2 and Crysis (okay, that's not a modern game, granted) both fully support DX10. There's a clear difference between running either on DX10 and on DX9.

[Risingred]

If you can play it on XP, you run it under DX9; that doesn't mean the game cannot run under DX10.

Actually, that's exactly what it means. I think Company of Heroes, shadowrun and stormrise are DX10 games. They only play on vista, no matter what. Because they are DX10 games. Putting in a shader4.0 effect does not mean it "supports DX10" or that it is a DX10 game.

There's certain D3D10 API issues and gpu memory paging behaviors that cannot be simply emulated. That's why DX10 is only on vista, amongst a plethora of other reasons, marketing-side or technical.
These effects that you see in "DX10 supported games" are not hardware-enabled in XP or below for that exact reason. They are simply codepathed to appear. It's a sham.

[Starving_Poet]

Aye, no publisher worth it's salt will make a DX10-only game. DX10 was a failure of epic proportions and DX11 will be out in a couple months.

[Akse]

DX10 partly failed because vista failed :)

Dx11 might be much better success.

[mordred]

Ehh...Windows 7 will be a huge success but has dx10 also... Of course we don't care that much!

Risingred it's my personal opinion that ati is better (and uses havock...) and intel overprised...

[Risingred]

DX10 partly failed because vista failed :)

Dx11 might be much better success.

It won't be. For a while at least.

DX11 is DX10 with a one attached. I don't believe many gaming companies are going to jump on it because they'd completely alienate their DX9 fanbase, who wouldn't be able to play (re:buy) their games.

[Starving_Poet]

DX10 partly failed because vista failed :)

Dx11 might be much better success.

I would actually say that Vista failed because DX10 failed. Gaming is such a huge segment of the software industry that they are required to shift the population over a new standard. MS should have released DX10 to the developers years before they went public with it.

[GuardianHadriel]

i´m just glad my computer rocks(:

[s4nder]

Blizzard games never have high requirements, the OP will be able to run D3 just fine. Also, recommending nVidia video cards just because you like the name and your last five cards were nVidia is misleading. ATI video cards rock. Additionally, processor power is becoming less and less important nowadays, buying an i7 is waste when an E8500 is all you need.

[drae]

Blizzard games never have high requirements, the OP will be able to run D3 just fine. Also, recommending nVidia video cards just because you like the name and your last five cards were nVidia is misleading. ATI video cards rock. Additionally, processor power is becoming less and less important nowadays, buying an i7 is waste when an E8500 is all you need.

Bah Video card selection is a personal choice, like deciding between a BMW and a Mercedes, both rule the roost at one time or another, and your getting a wicked good card either way. I am personally not an ATi fan, same reason I don't buy Ford or GM tho, bad past experiences and customer service so atrocious I swore I'd never return.

P.S. hope you don't wanna run some older Glide based games on that ATi. Last I heard (granted a while ago) there were no approved drivers for glide (read: old)games in vista on ATi.

And My i7 is hawt, my first intel in quite awhile (~10years) and I'm very happy with it. I might not need it today, but best to plan for tommorow...

[CaptainDingo]

Diablo 3 will run like butter if you have a modern computer. Anyone can tell you that just by looking at it.

[Drytchnath]

How about this setup?

Windows XP Pro
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ (2ghz)
1 gig of ram (can't remember frequency)
256mb Radeon 9800 Pro
Asus mobo, no PCI slots only AGP 8x

Old pc, runs TF2, albeit on less than stellar settings (ah! the jaggies! my eyes!) and of course ran D2 just fine. Most recent game I tried to run was the Trine demo-and it worked, was just ugly as sin with some occassional minor framerate stutters.

I intend to upgrade (i.e; build new) sometime in the next year. I dread to think what D3 would look like on this tired old rig...it's almost 7 years old!

[Usufruct]

How about this setup?

Windows XP Pro
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ (2ghz)
1 gig of ram (can't remember frequency)
256mb Radeon 9800 Pro
Asus mobo, no PCI slots only AGP 8x

Old pc, runs TF2, albeit on less than stellar settings (ah! the jaggies! my eyes!) and of course ran D2 just fine. Most recent game I tried to run was the Trine demo-and it worked, was just ugly as sin with some occassional minor framerate stutters.

I intend to upgrade (i.e; build new) sometime in the next year. I dread to think what D3 would look like on this tired old rig...it's almost 7 years old!

It would probably "run" it. That system would even run WoW crappy though, so don't expect to see 30 frames per second unless Blizzard lets you turn just about everything off. Time for a new box :)

[GuardianHadriel]

How about this setup?

Windows XP Pro
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ (2ghz)
1 gig of ram (can't remember frequency)
256mb Radeon 9800 Pro
Asus mobo, no PCI slots only AGP 8x

Old pc, runs TF2, albeit on less than stellar settings (ah! the jaggies! my eyes!) and of course ran D2 just fine. Most recent game I tried to run was the Trine demo-and it worked, was just ugly as sin with some occassional minor framerate stutters.

I intend to upgrade (i.e; build new) sometime in the next year. I dread to think what D3 would look like on this tired old rig...it's almost 7 years old!

Well since you´re already planning on getting a new one there´s no need to worry.

And by the way what i meant when i said that he should get a i7 and 280gtx was that if he wants "the tasty stuff" he should consider those things, with other stuff to support them too ofc.

[Gorny]

Spoeaking of new comps and things, I was browsing Dell's website and messing with the options on customizing an XPS. They have a 12Gig option. If I remember right the price tag on that memory alone was an extra $2K. I'll stick to 6G for an extra hundred or two.

[Risingred]

Spoeaking of new comps and things, I was browsing Dell's website and messing with the options on customizing an XPS. They have a 12Gig option. If I remember right the price tag on that memory alone was an extra $2K. I'll stick to 6G for an extra hundred or two.

What kind of system? An i7?

If you're willing to do a little bit of work I can help you build a pretty killer system at a highly reduced price. :D

I know I stated this elsewhere, maybe this thread, but a lot of the pre-built machines are expensive and come with kind of shoddy parts, such as the motherboard, capacitors, heatsink and RAM, HDDs...you get the point.
Convenient? Yes. A good deal? Nah.

[Gorny]

It was one of the new options of the XPS 730.

Actually, I have most of my system set up. I won't buy until I move house.

[Starving_Poet]

Basically, if you have the will to set aside $20 a week for a new computer, by the time Diablo 3 comes out you'll have $10-$20 thousand to spend on a shiny new rig ;)

[Gorny]

Basically, if you have the will to set aside $20 a week for a new computer, by the time Diablo 3 comes out you'll have $10-$20 thousand to spend on a shiny new rig ;)

Meh, I'm ahead there.

Money From CD and BLossom account + the change from my pocket piling up in a 5 gallon water container.

But the $20 a week thing won't work in reality... not with owning a house and needing a new car sooner rather than later.

[Starving_Poet]

But the $20 a week thing won't work in reality... not with owning a house and needing a new car sooner rather than later.

Well, the number is all a matter of perspective, but it's the concept. If you can't afford to put aside any money every week, then you really can't afford to buy a new computer! :scratchchin:

[Dahmer]

That would be going from a dual core to a new-gen quad core. Those boards require high PSU wattage and DDR3 RAM. It's not cheap.High PSU wattage? Sorry but that's bull****. I'm using a 620W Corsair on mine while it could do with 500W or a bit less and I mainly went with the 620 version because that one was modular.
Wait until the game launches...And do not switch to nvidia or intel...!AMD / Ati = good performance for low price
nvidia / intel = higher performance for higher price
value/performance you're better off with AMD / Ati, if you got $$$$$ to spend, go nvidia/intel :D (that's what I did)

my system now :
Intel i7 920 D0 overclocked to 4 GHz (default 2.66)
EVGA GTX 260 c 216 Superclocked version overclocked a bit more to 710 / 1420 / 1150 (default 626 / 1350 / 1053 )
6 GB DDR3 @ 1600 MHz
Gigabyte UD5 mainboard
Corsair 620HX supply to provide the juice

Blizzard games never have high requirements, the OP will be able to run D3 just fine. Also, recommending nVidia video cards just because you like the name and your last five cards were nVidia is misleading. ATI video cards rock. Additionally, processor power is becoming less and less important nowadays, buying an i7 is waste when an E8500 is all you need.Very true, Blizzard tries to reach a public as big as possible and they do so by making settings highly adaptable / scalable.
I don't quite agree with the i7 vs E8500 part.... if you don't want to spend money on an i7 system buying an E8500 is a bad idea, get a Phenom II instead.

@Gorny :
Dell? Ugh....build your own system! :p
Omg those are so overpriced :|

Really hope you're not buying that...throwing away money basically =s
I just spent some time and selected some components on site where I bought my parts and the difference in price is rather big.
Comparing to the XPS 730X with an i7 940 that costs bit over € 3000 I made a few changes :
- i7 950 instead of i7 940
- 1000 GB spinpoint F1 instead of that 750gb hd
- 6GB 1600MHz triple channel kit from corsair
- Antec Nine Hundred Two as a case (can obviously go for something cheaper or something you think looks better)
- Corsair 620HX as supply (great psu & modular)
- gigabyte UD5 as motherboard for stability and overclocking options

Whole system with parts I picked comes down to € 1715.
Now there's a €1300 euro difference in price and in parts...the only thing that XPS has is watercooling, you're basically spending over €1300 on cooling and brand name. ****ed up part is they don't even list what parts they used for the liquid cooling system.

[Silverfang]

Basically, if you have the will to set aside $20 a week for a new computer, by the time Diablo 3 comes out you'll have $10-$20 thousand to spend on a shiny new rig ;)

20 Bucks a week? (Ok, for me it's €, but...) That's what I got for living a week!
Such tips won't work...

Still hoping D3 will run on a PIV-3Ghz with a Gforce 7300GT. That's all I got here and no funds on the horizon to get my system upgraded...

[blikst]

20 Bucks a week? (Ok, for me it's €, but...) That's what I got for living a week!
Such tips won't work...

Still hoping D3 will run on a PIV-3Ghz with a Gforce 7300GT. That's all I got here and no funds on the horizon to get my system upgraded...

I don't mean to be rude, but how do you manage to live on $20 (or euro) a week? Here in sweden, you earn that in an hour or two working. Heck, only my rent is about $150/week.

Edit: It just occured to me that you might not be old enough to get a decent job. In that case I appologise. :)

[Leord]

While I am nowhere near good enough with hardware to make predictions, we have an absolute genius over at StarcraftWire.net called Kalos, and while he don't have time for in-depth analyses over here right now (and the game is still pretty far away), you will get pretty far by comparing what is known about SC2, which is surprisingly much, considering no official system specs have been released...

I am fairly certain some of this will help a big bunch.


General Analysis (a year ago) (http://starcraft.incgamers.com/articles/comments/starcraft-2-system-requirements/)

Confirmed he was right from leaked AMD/Blizz documents (http://starcraft.incgamers.com/articles/comments/starcraft-2-graphics-requirements-confirmed/)

Hardware Purchase Guide (http://starcraft.incgamers.com/articles/comments/kalos-starcraft-2-hardware-guide/) - The final result :)

Electronic Sports League Machines used for SC2 (http://starcraft.incgamers.com/articles/comments/starcraft-ii-specs-emerge/)



Additional Hardware Info:


The Graphics Engine, Havok (http://starcraft.incgamers.com/articles/comments/wreaking-havok-with-starcraft-ii/)

Multicore processing & SC2 (http://starcraft.incgamers.com/articles/comments/one-two-four-starcraft-ii-and-multicore/)

Shaders & DX10 (http://starcraft.incgamers.com/articles/comments/starcraft-ii-shaders-and-directx-10/) - SC2 will be DX9 native.

[Dahmer]

Well that was an interesting read, thank you for the links Leord :)

[Risingred]

High PSU wattage? Sorry but that's bull****.


I don't think so. I consider 620W to be high wattage. What sounds suspect is someone overclocking a 920 to 4ghz and actually being able to use it for some kind of function.

[SlechtWeerBeer]

I don't think so. I consider 620W to be high wattage. What sounds suspect is someone overclocking a 920 to 4ghz and actually being able to use it for some kind of function.

I've a 900W supply in my current setup. At the moment, I'm not using it all, but I'm planning to (CrossfireX setup).
620W is not that high, really, if you have a modern setup.

[Risingred]

I've a 900W supply in my current setup. At the moment, I'm not using it all, but I'm planning to (CrossfireX setup).
620W is not that high, really, if you have a modern setup.

I still kind of think it is. I was running on a dual-rail 350W on my dualcore setup. Never peaked on it.
I picked up a 750W (which I'm currently using) in case I ever plan on doing something strenuous but I probably won't.

[Usufruct]

It's not just as simple as looking at the maximum rated PSU wattage and saying that's either good enough or not good enough for a given setup. There are many other factors that should be taken into consideration when selecting a power supply.

[Risingred]

It's not just as simple as looking at the maximum rated PSU wattage and saying that's either good enough or not good enough for a given setup. There are many other factors that should be taken into consideration when selecting a power supply.

Exactly.
Admittedly, though. PSUs have never really been my area. I just kind of go with what I'm told on those.

[Usufruct]

my system now :
Intel i7 920 D0 overclocked to 4 GHz (default 2.66)
EVGA GTX 260 c 216 Superclocked version overclocked a bit more

Why would you bother overclocking your i7 so much, do you do a lot of video encoding or something?

[Risingred]

we have an absolute genius over at StarcraftWire.net called Kalos

Y'know I never made an account to comment on his articles but I read and enjoyed all of them. He did a great job, and the graphics you set up for it were very nice as well.

[Silverfang]

I don't mean to be rude, but how do you manage to live on $20 (or euro) a week? Here in sweden, you earn that in an hour or two working. Heck, only my rent is about $150/week.

Edit: It just occured to me that you might not be old enough to get a decent job. In that case I appologise. :)

Nope, I'm old enough for a job but ain't gettin' any.
Long-term-jobless is what they call me...
Rent is paid by officials, but not electricity, nor heating, nor telephone/internet, nor anything else.
To be correct: It's more around 150€ per month, thus near double the 20 bucks a week. But still too slim for more than sustain one's existence. (Not using the term "more than living" was intentionally ;))

[Starving_Poet]

Nope, I'm old enough for a job but ain't gettin' any.
Long-term-jobless is what they call me...
Rent is paid by officials, but not electricity, nor heating, nor telephone/internet, nor anything else.
To be correct: It's more around 150€ per month, thus near double the 20 bucks a week. But still too slim for more than sustain one's existence. (Not using the term "more than living" was intentionally ;))

I know what I want to say will get me in trouble. But the $20 is just an arbitrary number. It's a simple slush fund concept. One hour's worth of income a week just budgeted to your a new computer fund is typically enough to keep up with the trends without breaking the bank. But you've proven your point and of course there exceptions to the rule.

[blikst]

Nope, I'm old enough for a job but ain't gettin' any.
Long-term-jobless is what they call me...
Rent is paid by officials, but not electricity, nor heating, nor telephone/internet, nor anything else.
To be correct: It's more around 150€ per month, thus near double the 20 bucks a week. But still too slim for more than sustain one's existence. (Not using the term "more than living" was intentionally ;))

Ah, I see. I've been in that situation before, needing a new computer and not having the income to buy one. It sucks (as well as the long term jobless thing of course ;) ). But I'm pretty sure you will be able to run the game with the specs you mentioned, so I wouldn't worry to much about that if I where you. At least if you are like me and don't have to play a game on max settings to enjoy it. :)

[Dahmer]

I don't think so. I consider 620W to be high wattage. What sounds suspect is someone overclocking a 920 to 4ghz and actually being able to use it for some kind of function.-500 = low
500-700 = medium
700+ = high
If I kept the stock settings I wouldn't have a problem at all using a 500W supply.
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/824/14/
291 W under load from the whole system with an i7 965

Besides that what do you mean with that last line? You're confusing me now :o It's running at 4 GHz all the time and it's running fine and stable, does everything I want it to do.

Why would you bother overclocking your i7 so much, do you do a lot of video encoding or something?Bother? Much? It's easier than you think ;) First stepping (C0/C1) of 920's had some issues getting over 3.8GHz but with the D0 it's really easy getting 4 GHz or higher with a good heatsink.


back on the topic of DIII and system requirements :
I just read the SC2 articles again and I'm guessing that what Kalos came up with as requirements for SC2 will more than likely be very close to DIII.
They want to make it look nice but it's still blizzard, a company that wants "everyone" to enjoy the game.

[Risingred]

Besides that what do you mean with that last line? You're confusing me now :o It's running at 4 GHz all the time and it's running fine and stable, does everything I want it to do.

Huh. I've been having heat issues above 3.6 with my 920. I wonder what the BIOS looks like on your machine.

[Dahmer]

Well i7's get burning hot and I hope you're not trying that on the stock heatsink :o
I got a scythe mugen 2 on mine and temperatures only went close to 80°C when I was running OCCT (serious stability test) Don't be alarmed by 80°C because that's still 20° under the "max" where the cpu will still work but slow down to prevent heat damage. Basically just keep it under 85-90 during stress testing and you should be fine.

If yours is running hotter than that you need a different heatsink/cooler or the one you have isn't installed like it should be.

bios settings off the top of my head :
turbo disabled, eist disabled, ht on
bclk 200, mem multi x8, uncore multi x17
llc enabled, vcore 1.4, qpi/vtt 1.3 (around that...), ram voltage 1.68

Those are the settings I changed....I think, at work right now so can't check :p

[Risingred]

No, I have a decent heatsink. All copper, fin-type with a fan and tubes. It was a pita to put in.

I saved that to wordpad for down the line...I don't really need a higher clockrate right now. I was having a weird problem and I reset my BIOS a while back, but I think I'll just leave it stock.

[Usufruct]

Bother? Much? It's easier than you think ;) First stepping (C0/C1) of 920's had some issues getting over 3.8GHz but with the D0 it's really easy getting 4 GHz or higher with a good heatsink.

Oh, I'm sure it's not difficult, I just don't really see the benefit if it's a gaming rig. Bragging rights I guess?

[Dahmer]

4 GHz don't even give me bragging rights :o It is useful though because it's not just gaming I do on here.