ive overclocked my E6600 to 2.8ghz on a 401mhz FSB, but windows & 3dmark & Everest all report it as a 3.6ghz overclock. ive checked with CPUZ and it reports the 2.8ghz @401mhz.
any ideas?
Printable View
ive overclocked my E6600 to 2.8ghz on a 401mhz FSB, but windows & 3dmark & Everest all report it as a 3.6ghz overclock. ive checked with CPUZ and it reports the 2.8ghz @401mhz.
any ideas?
what does it say on the boot up screen? 401mhz does sound more like a 3ghz+ overclock i think
i made it 401mhz * 7 multiplier = 2807ghz
beats me then
A lot of software shows the overclock as if the multiplier hasnt been lowered, so it still thinks it is doing 400x9, when in fact it is doing 400x7....sandra should report it right :)
If the 6600 can go down from a 9x to a 7x multiplier can the lower end chips E4300, 6400, 6300 etc do the same? Go from 8x (6400) down to a 6x ?
My E4300 wont, but aparently some will. Not much point in dropping the multi on E6400/6300.Quote:
Originally Posted by dbh
mine posted @ 9x 401 but windows didnt like it n ive only got stock cooling at the moment.
it does work @ 8 x 401 which is 3.2ghz but it idled @ 42c, like the 2.8ghz does now but i didint want to risk that speed on stock cooling :)
Things will be a lot faster at 9x400, rather than 9x401 - 401 onwards, the chipset strap resets and your memory takes a rather large and ugly hit up to about 450fsb :)
This is due to Intel SpeedStep i think. It lowers the multiplyer when idle. If you run a program that will use your CPU and bit more, it should jump up to 3.6ghz again.
Its not. It does it with speedstep disabled.Quote:
Originally Posted by DecomposingStar
I see.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clunk