Associate
Currently idling at 20-21 degrees C, ambient in room is 15 degrees C.
Q6600 @ 3.8ghz - But plenty BSOD's
- Thread starter toon_mad
- Start date
thats insane, ive seen the pics myself but it doesnt seem real to have such low temps 
Associate
I've just installed RealTemp 2.90 and the tjmax has been increased to 100 from 95 in version 2.70
ive got 2.70, i manually set the tjmax to 90 - i think thats right?
another loss to the toon 
just read that if you overclock the pci-e frequency from 100mhz it can help overclocks, im going to try 110mhz see if it helps..
just read that if you overclock the pci-e frequency from 100mhz it can help overclocks, im going to try 110mhz see if it helps..
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2008
- Posts
- 77
beinterested in the outcome toon
ive been inspired, ive got mine at 3.5 atm
ive been inspired, ive got mine at 3.5 atm
ok, so i set the pci-e frequency to 110mhz and low and behold it did have some good, although not sure if it will have a negative effect on anything but with it set at that, im now at 3.7ghz, on a vcore of 1.540v according to cpu-z, its done prime95 since last post seems pretty stable, at least in that short time.
I also noticed setting the pci-e clock from 100mhz to 110mhz give me a couple frame per second quicker, tested on the same 3.6ghz as before.
Give it a go if you have that option, i guess like with anything, dont go crazy and set it something like 180mhz and zap your gfx card
So far so good though, im at least 4 vcore options less then i was before at 3.7ghz, but im stuck in the situation of should i pass the 1.55vore mark just for the extra 100mhz? I think i might call it a day @ 3.7ghz - its too tempting though for that extra bit
whats your setup rob? ..dont matter, just seen your sig
I also noticed setting the pci-e clock from 100mhz to 110mhz give me a couple frame per second quicker, tested on the same 3.6ghz as before.
Give it a go if you have that option, i guess like with anything, dont go crazy and set it something like 180mhz and zap your gfx card
So far so good though, im at least 4 vcore options less then i was before at 3.7ghz, but im stuck in the situation of should i pass the 1.55vore mark just for the extra 100mhz? I think i might call it a day @ 3.7ghz - its too tempting though for that extra bit
whats your setup rob? ..dont matter, just seen your sig
Associate
I'll give that a go and see if I can reduce my vcore. Should have my water cooling fitted sometime next week as well and the overclock big time we go
sweet, i would have went watercooled but i like the TRUE's too much
what kind of a overclock you looking for?
what kind of a overclock you looking for?
Associate
Over 4GHz would be sweet but will still be happy with anything over 3.6 really
i always said 3ghz but started getting power hungry for more
Associate
With tjmax set at 95, i'm hitting 70c during prime95 with air cooling
Do you use core temp as well? I found it core temp for quad core more accurate than real temp as core temp gives the same output with everest, HWmonitor, etc
I just put up my FSB to 380 to 3.4GHz and vCore 1.443, with intelburntest hit 70c 100%. Gonna try hit 3.5GHz later if i can as when i tried with vCore 1.46250 got BSOD when did intelburntest.
I just put up my FSB to 380 to 3.4GHz and vCore 1.443, with intelburntest hit 70c 100%. Gonna try hit 3.5GHz later if i can as when i tried with vCore 1.46250 got BSOD when did intelburntest.
i know you can use intel burn test, prime95 etc for stress testing - but i honestly would never have my quad running nearly 80% or higher for a long time, under load my cores reach about 47c-50c, its just my vcore is at 1.56v which has not been reccomended, its down to me if i want to increase this i know, i just wish someone would come on here and say 1.6v is fine, i can hit 3.8ghz then
Soldato
i know you can use intel burn test, prime95 etc for stress testing - but i honestly would never have my quad running nearly 80% or higher for a long time, under load my cores reach about 47c-50c, its just my vcore is at 1.56v which has not been reccomended, its down to me if i want to increase this i know, i just wish someone would come on here and say 1.6v is fine, i can hit 3.8ghz then
Why do you think 1.6V isn't OK?
Have a look at the [URL="http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17790550]Official SuperPi thread[/URL] and you'll see people running Q6600's with massive volts. As far as I am aware there are no reported electron migration issues with Q6600's or the older E6xx0 series CPUs. You are far more likely to damage the CPU by running too high a VTT rather than Vcore.
Soldato
I said that many people on here including myself wouldn't feel that comfortable running 1.6Vcore through a 65nm chip for 24/7 usage.
Soldato
Well if you want someone just to say 1.6v is fine then, it is fine if you prepare for another cpu
I really don't want to get in your face over this, but what are basing that statement on?
Agreed, but if the load temperatures are OK and the system is stable, then what's the problem?
Soldato
But based on what evidence of CPUs failing? I've got 8 machines here in my SAP test suite, all running at least 3.6GHz and all are running 1.5V plus. They literally run 100% 24/7 and none of them is showing any evidence of problems. The early G0 Q6600's had much higher Vids that the current ones and most of them need big volts to hit 3.6GHz, let alone 3.8GHz+. I've never heard of a Q6600 failing after being overclocked, or even E8x00 and Q9x00 CPUs other than the first couple that were reported on Extreme Systems.