Q6600 overclocking a newbie question

scott wilcox · 16 Dec 2007 at 09:59

Just been stress testing (i.e Prime 95) and with coretemp at the default FSB settings i get coretemps of 47C. It seems stable at this point.

Now to overclock surely i need to get the FSB from 266MHz to something like 333Mhz to make a real difference (multiplier seems to be x9). This would give me about 3GHz. Is there really much point in going for less ?

Do i need better cooling to get to this FSB frequency? How hot can the cores get ?

WJA96 · 16 Dec 2007 at 10:24

scott wilcox said:
Now to overclock surely i need to get the FSB from 266MHz to something like 333Mhz to make a real difference (multiplier seems to be x9). This would give me about 3GHz. Is there really much point in going for less ?

Every single FSB is worth having as they all increase performance.

scott wilcox said:
Do i need better cooling to get to this FSB frequency? How hot can the cores get ?

You probably do want a better cooler. The Cores will hit 100C and then they'll throttle back to stop damage to the CPU. Some people are comfortable running CPUs over 80C (I am), many are not. Some people will post saying that 70C is the absolute limit, others will say 65C. Ultimately it comes down to bottle. I can afford to melt a CPU if it happens - so far it hasn't. If you can't, then don't overclock to the extremes. Overclocking is pretty safe, but it is a risk as you are invalidating the warranty, and Intel can supposedly detect if a CPU has been voltage abused these days.

Pneumonic · 16 Dec 2007 at 11:17

scott wilcox said:
Just been stress testing (i.e Prime 95) and with coretemp at the default FSB settings i get coretemps of 47C. It seems stable at this point.

Now to overclock surely i need to get the FSB from 266MHz to something like 333Mhz to make a real difference (multiplier seems to be x9). This would give me about 3GHz. Is there really much point in going for less ?

Do i need better cooling to get to this FSB frequency? How hot can the cores get ?

If you have a G0 stepping chip you should get 3-3.2 on the stock cooler, shouldnt need much vcore increase just keep an eye on the temps..

temps are really up to you... for everyday use then i wouldnt go over 70c

WJA96 · 16 Dec 2007 at 11:26

Pneumonic said:
for everyday use then i wouldnt go over 70c

I just have to ask!

Why? Why settle on 70C? Intel have effectively told us where the danger mark is by putting a limiter on these chips at 100C, so why run them at 70% of maximum?

Jokester · 16 Dec 2007 at 11:28

Yeah, as long as it's stable I wouldn't worry about temperatures as you're not likely to fully stress it out again in normal use.

Jokester

Pneumonic · 16 Dec 2007 at 11:44

WJA96 said:
I just have to ask!

Why? Why settle on 70C? Intel have effectively told us where the danger mark is by putting a limiter on these chips at 100C, so why run them at 70% of maximum?

I guess because when overclocking you are stressing the CPU in other ways extra volts etc... 30% safe zone

Pneumonic · 16 Dec 2007 at 11:45

Jokester said:
Yeah, as long as it's stable I wouldn't worry about temperatures as you're not likely to fully stress it out again in normal use.

Jokester

so some advice then! I am never to sure on what vcore I can use once i am past 1.5v, if my temps are stable can i keep increasing it? or is there a limit?

Jokester · 16 Dec 2007 at 11:54

Pneumonic said:
so some advice then! I am never to sure on what vcore I can use once i am past 1.5v, if my temps are stable can i keep increasing it? or is there a limit?

On normal cooling (air or water) it's not likely that you'll be able to put sufficiently much voltage through it whilst keeping it stable that any degradation due to overvoltage will reduce it's lifespan to less than it's useful life (ie it'll reduce it's lifespan, but are you still going to be using that CPU in 5-10years time?). Even then people are still using max overclocked AMD T-birds and the like.

Jokester

yantorsen · 16 Dec 2007 at 12:06

well I'd worry about temps, if you don't want it to burn out within a few years.

expecially if you're running it at over 80C!

Pneumonic · 16 Dec 2007 at 12:37

Jokester said:
On normal cooling (air or water) it's not likely that you'll be able to put sufficiently much voltage through it whilst keeping it stable that any degradation due to overvoltage will reduce it's lifespan to less than it's useful life (ie it'll reduce it's lifespan, but are you still going to be using that CPU in 5-10years time?). Even then people are still using max overclocked AMD T-birds and the like.

Jokester

Ok good to know... feel I can still get more than 3.745 out of this CPU but wanted to check bout the Vcore

WJA96 · 16 Dec 2007 at 12:42

yantorsen said:
well I'd worry about temps, if you don't want it to burn out within a few years.

expecially if you're running it at over 80C!

How old is the oldest overclocked cpu you have running?

If it's over 3 years you're very unusual. Most enthusiasts replace thir stuff inside 2 years.

yantorsen · 16 Dec 2007 at 15:11

WJA96 said:
How old is the oldest overclocked cpu you have running?

If it's over 3 years you're very unusual. Most enthusiasts replace thir stuff inside 2 years.

5 years old, nearly 6.

WJA96 · 16 Dec 2007 at 16:28

yantorsen said:
5 years old, nearly 6.

I'm sure that either means you a) didn't overclock it enough or b) your whole argument is weakened

I should probably point out that the oldest CPU in my portfolio is about 5 months, so I'm not sure I'll ever find out if they don't last several years. What I do know is that you can have cool or silent. I want silent, and that means no fans. No fans = lots of heat.

I've got several completely passive heavily overclocked systems, and they all seem to run F@H 100% load 24/7 no problems.

yantorsen · 16 Dec 2007 at 16:35

it's just an Athlon XP 2600+ clocked to 2.6ghz

nothing extreme.

can't remember how old it is, but it's atleast 4years.

and it was used 24/7 until I got my current system about 3 months ago.

scott wilcox · 16 Dec 2007 at 18:47

Got it to 2.7Ghz. Try more next week. Stable with Prime 95 and the temperature is stable
at 49-50C. Looks promising. Just changed the FSB from 266 to 300Mhz.

Looks as if the DDR2 has also overclocked. I guess at some point i might have to change the system memory multiplier. I am using Corsair 2GB DDR2 XMS2-6400C4 TwinX (2x1GB).
What do you guys reckon. Will i need to use the memory multiplier ?