High temp? (image inside)

cozm01

cozm01

cozm01

Associate
Joined
29 Nov 2004
Posts
349
I overclocked my e6600 to 3.6 on air, using this guide..
http://evga.com/forums/tm.asp?m=61146

Been running fine so far, but temperatures worry me, check out the overclock and tell me if its ok?

speedfaniw0.jpg


cpuzws5.jpg
 
Is that on Vista?

Is that a load temp?

I don't think Speedfan is the most reliable temp monitoring app about for Core2's.

Have you tried Core Temp? I believe you need to disable driver signing or something for it work properly on Vista though.

Everest might be a good bet too?
 
I'd bench with Orthos for 5 minutes on priority 7 to see what the temperatures rise too. If they don't go above 65/70c~ then I'd be happy with that. Otherwise I'd say that the temperatures are too high. Also as previously mentioned I'd consult Core Temp as Speedfan can give wrong results.
 
"Torture Test ran 3 minutes 40 seconds"
Orthos failed, gets to 71c, time to underclock?

How about my overclock, are the ram timings ok etc?
 
Last edited:
Reduced from 1600FSB to 1500.
Orthos didn't halt this time (see below), but reached 78c, should I underclock more?

orthoshh8.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well you are only 7c below the max tjunction temp for your CPU, so unless you don't mind frying it very soon, then I would say yes.

Either that or get better cooling.
 
Does the VCore need to be that high? If not try going back to 3.2 and lowering the VCore till it doesn't boot or Orthos fails. Then raise the FSB slowly untill you need more voltage and find a ballance between fsb/voltage and temperature.
 
Reduced vcore from 1.4/Auto gradually to 1.325, failed straight away in Orthos.
So put it from 1.325 to 1.35, ran for 10 mins at 68c, ~10c lower than before.

135vra2.jpg



Update: Orthos just stopped at 15mins, but temperatures were the same, is this good enough?
 
Last edited:
No.

15 mins is nothing, I can do that at 3.6.

2 hours minimum. Get better cooling or clock back even further.

I guess you are using stock cooler? I didn't get higher than 3ghz 1.3V using my E6600 with mine.
 
If it were my I'd start at 3.2Ghz and work up. Lowering the voltage and getting 15m stable shows good promise for your chip. There are 'sweet spots' of voltage at a given frequency so if you want to exhaust your options try a wider range of voltage options at this frequency - but remember not to put too much through the chip less it melts/just plain dies.
 
Chris Beard said:
If it were my I'd start at 3.2Ghz and work up. Lowering the voltage and getting 15m stable shows good promise for your chip. There are 'sweet spots' of voltage at a given frequency so if you want to exhaust your options try a wider range of voltage options at this frequency - but remember not to put too much through the chip less it melts/just plain dies.
Click to expand...

There is no point if he can't keep the temp <70C, which I dont think he can with more V.

He needs better cooling. End of really. Unless he wants to kill it within 6 months.

From my experience, 15/20 mins failing required 0.05V more V to get it stable for 2 hours or 0.075 to get it stable for 8 hours.

400x7 = 2.8ghz at 1.25V and work from there.
 
Seems stable at 3ghz. I'm happy with that, also some extra cooling could get twice as good overclock. Results below, thanks for help guys.

1333idlelh3.jpg


1333loadoa6.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom