-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
What voltage are you at again?
Regarding the mosfet coolers, you know that you can just take them off and use ramsinks, and grab a zalman passive heatsink for the NB, total cost of around a tenner.
Oooh, CPU-Z says 1.36V for CPU voltage...
edit:
After discovering the voltages were actually set to "Auto" in the BIOS (no I do not want the board to fiddle with the temperatures to "maintain" stability :rolleyes: ) , I've set them to "normal", and now CPU-Z reports the voltage as 1.248V...
Temperatures have gone down a bit at idle.
At idle: 45/42/36/42
Load: 69/69/60/62...
Strange thing is, the load temperatures are virtually identical. What sort of temperatures should I be aiming for?
Edit 2: I can't do the tweaking the temps thing as my HSF fits on with pins, not screws... Any other suggestions to make the temperatures more even? 60degC under load for all 4 cores sounds like a good goal to me, or should I aim for less?
Or, get a different HSF maybe?
http://store.over-clock.com/prespec_kits.html :undecided but rather expensive
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bwgames
Oooh, CPU-Z says 1.36V for CPU voltage...
edit:
After discovering the voltages were actually set to "Auto" in the BIOS (no I do not want the board to fiddle with the temperatures to "maintain" stability :rolleyes: ) , I've set them to "normal", and now CPU-Z reports the voltage as 1.248V...
Temperatures have gone down a bit at idle.
At idle: 45/42/36/42
Load: 69/69/60/62...
Strange thing is, the load temperatures are virtually identical. What sort of temperatures should I be aiming for?
Edit 2: I can't do the tweaking the temps thing as my HSF fits on with pins, not screws... Any other suggestions to make the temperatures more even? 60degC under load for all 4 cores sounds like a good goal to me, or should I aim for less?
Or, get a different HSF maybe?
http://store.over-clock.com/prespec_kits.html :undecided but rather expensive
Never use cpu-z to check voltages, its not accurate.
I forget what the level is, but once you get past a certain voltage, it just defaults back down to displaying a much lower voltage than you actually have.
Set your vcore manually first, say 1.4v (or whatever you like), and lower your overclock a bit, then get it stable using that voltage.
Doesnt the Uguru thing work? If not, try speedfan or everest, take a rough average and see if it matches with what you have set in the bios.
To me, it just sounds like AUTO is giving the CPU about 1.5v and thats where your high temps are coming from.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
[B][SIZE="3"]To me, it just sounds like AUTO is giving the CPU about 1.5v and thats where your high temps are coming from.
Hang on a minute, you mean auto doesn't give it what ever the CPU tells it to (i.e.Vid) ? I have mine set to auto on my Asus P5K Deluxe...
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
Never use cpu-z to check voltages, its not accurate.
I forget what the level is, but once you get past a certain voltage, it just defaults back down to displaying a much lower voltage that you actually have.
Set your vcore manually first, say 1.4v (or whatever you like), and lower your overclock a bit, then get it stable using that voltage.
Doesnt the Uguru thing work? If not, try speedfan or everest, take a rough average and see if it matches with what you have set in the bios.
To me, it just sounds like AUTO is giving the CPU about 1.5v and thats where your high temps are coming from.
What should I use for checking voltages? The gigabyte software?
I'll try overclocking a bit now, but are those temperatures ok for stock?
Its a Gigabyte board, not Abit/Asus. It has something that enables you to change CPU FSB etc from within windows, and IIRC it has temperature monitoring as well as voltages - will check after work. Is that likely to be more accurate/useful than coretemp/cpu-z etc?
yeah, auto was giving my board 1.38V, when "normal" was what the CPU was asking for (1.24V).
Quote:
Hang on a minute, you mean auto doesn't give it what ever the CPU tells it to (i.e.Vid) ? I have mine set to auto on my Asus P5K Deluxe...
I think it depends on the board. On my gigabyte, Auto alters all motherboard voltages to give what it deems sensible.... not a very good idea. Might be different for Asus.
-
I've got my voltage set on auto also on my p5k deluxe, could explain why the temps are going from 40 to 70c from idle to load when oc'ed to 3.25GHz on my Q6600.
Whats a safe voltage to start from? What increments should I up this by if I dont have success and whats the limit when overvolting?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bwgames
What should I use for checking voltages?
I'll try overclocking a bit now, but are those temperatures ok for stock?
Its a Gigabyte board, not Abit/Asus. It has something that enables you to change CPU FSB etc from within windows, and IIRC it has temperature monitoring as well as voltages - will check after work. Is that likely to be more accurate/useful than coretemp/cpu-z etc?
yeah, auto was giving my board 1.38V, when "normal" was what the CPU was asking for (1.24V).
I think it depends on the board. On my gigabyte, Auto alters all motherboard voltages to give what it deems sensible.... not a very good idea. Might be different for Asus.
Ah, sorry mate, for some reason, I thought you were on Abit - Yes, use the gigabyte software. I would have thought that if the gigabyte software isnt accurate, then nothing will be, but I havent tried it, so cant conclusively say :)
Most of the time, the AUTO setting is fine, especially for dual core, as they dont get as hot.
See how you get on with the gigabyte software.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fat jez
Hang on a minute, you mean auto doesn't give it what ever the CPU tells it to (i.e.Vid) ? I have mine set to auto on my Asus P5K Deluxe...
Cheers,
Stephen
No, AUTO gives it whatever it feels is needed, and sometimes it gets it wrong.
This is why, in the guide, I mention tweaking the voltages. Quite often, you can shave off a chunk of voltage by changing back to manual vcore.
-
Maybe a table of volts vs OC might help...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
No, AUTO gives it whatever it feels is needed, and sometimes it gets it wrong.
This is why, in the guide, I mention tweaking the voltages. Quite often, you can shave off a chunk of voltage by changing back to manual vcore.
Thanks, I'll have a play when I get home from work. Just need to work out what voltage the CPU is currently using, WITHOUT using the virus that is Asus Probe. I got the dreaded AsIO.sys missing error, even after removing the Probe software and it took me most of last night to get rid of it, going through the registry and removing all references to Asus and then doing the same on the C drive.
Clunk, which chipset blocks are you using?
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fat jez
Thanks, I'll have a play when I get home from work. Just need to work out what voltage the CPU is currently using, WITHOUT using the virus that is Asus Probe.
On that subject, is there a vendor-independent program that people would recommend for reading voltages?
CoreTemp is recommended for temperatures, but what about voltages?
I have to say, this is one aspect where I like Gigabyte - voltage modification in the BIOS is given as + / - the stock voltage, rather than just a list of voltages in themselves.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
[GSV]Trig
Maybe a table of volts vs OC might help...
It wont work unfortunately because some chips need silly amounts and some need none, or just a tiny amount for a decent overclock :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bwgames
On that subject, is there a vendor-independent program that people would recommend for reading voltages?
CoreTemp is recommended for temperatures, but what about voltages?
I have to say, this is one aspect where I like Gigabyte - voltage modification in the BIOS is given as + / - the stock voltage, rather than just a list of voltages in themselves.
For Asus, I use Asus probe 2.
There will often be a slight drop in voltage shown in windows due to droop (sometimes a large drop on Asus boards).
Just try a few different ones, and use the one that you prefer that is reasonably close.
I would suggest sticking with the manufacturers software if you are unsure.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fat jez
Thanks, I'll have a play when I get home from work. Just need to work out what voltage the CPU is currently using, WITHOUT using the virus that is Asus Probe. I got the dreaded AsIO.sys missing error, even after removing the Probe software and it took me most of last night to get rid of it, going through the registry and removing all references to Asus and then doing the same on the C drive.
Clunk, which chipset blocks are you using?
Cheers,
Stephen
Asus probe has always been ok for me for voltages. The only problem I had with it was that it didnt play nice with Vista x64, apparently it does now, but I've yet to try it :)
Latest version of Asus Probe 2.
Edit: Still looking for recommendations for Coolers, Waterblocks, Motherboards etc for use with Quad Core CPUs to add to the first post! :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
Asus probe has always been ok for me for voltages. The only problem I had with it was that it didnt play nice with Vista x64, apparently it does now, but I've yet to try it :)
[/SIZE]
Yeah, that was the one I tried, but I was getting a popup window every time I rebooted my machine or started it up complaining it couldn't find AsIO.sys, which continued even after I removed it. Took me all last night to get rid of it. I read a few posts on the net from people who had reported this to Asus who claimed it wasn't even their software that caused it! (Even though it's part of Asus Probe!).
Clunk, which chipset block are you using on your motherboard?
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Sorry, I meant to say before, its a bog standard DangerDen Maze4 chipset block with 1/2" barbs, all my stuff is here.
Not sure about the asIO thing, not used it for a while, but I will try it later and see if it does it on this vista x64 install.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
Sorry, I meant to say before, its a bog standard DangerDen Maze4 chipset block with 1/2" barbs.
Not sure about the asIO thing, not used it for a while, but I will try it later and see if it does it on this vista x64 install.
Make sure you take a system restore snapshot first, just in case! :D It didn't do it to me first time, but after I removed it and put on a later version, I got the problem.
As for your chipset block, what happened to the heatpipe cooling from the south to north bridge and onto the MOSFETs? Any pics so I can see what you've done?
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Pics to it all above in the link :)
I have a ghost image of the install if it goes tits up :D
-
I'll recommend the Quad gt again, as its 24hr stable at 355x9 (3.2ghz) bridge is at 1.45v and the cpu is at 1.37v, only problem is the mosfets need some serious cooling if your overclocking.
-
The 19th-century explorer Richard Burton had a decisively negative opinion towards firearms. Not on the grounds of violence, mind you, he was not averse to regular "social altercations", as it were, but simply because they were unsporting. Any woman, child (and these days many do), or adult commoner could fire a gun and win a duel (this is the 19th century) without the slightest skill, forebearing, or (dare it be) 'elan'. He continued throughout his life to adhere to the sword, a man's weapon of choice, as it required training, experience, spirit, and a sort of "earned respect", if you will, to master such a weapon of honour.
This attitude could be moved to the modern by a general distain for those who buy Lamborghini's and Ferrari's without even a driver's license to boast of.
Richard Burton wouldn't have liked me; I'm a newbie with a gun. Don't hate me.
As the proud owner of an admittedly ridiculous QX6800 (running on a Commando), it was just the result of one of those spur-of-the-moment type of days when you have more money than sense, and no girlfriend in sight to tell you not to, if you know what I mean. Ah well, what's done is done.
This has led me thusly to your thread.
I've spent the last week happily reading Clunk's guide, related posts, etc. And I must thank him for even the simplest suggestions about setting memory latencies in the BIOS manually in lieu of just leaving everything to AUTO. I also spent my life's most frustrating day trying to adhere to his suggestions about balancing the heat-sink on the processor for even temps. Ultimately successful (thanks again) all was made clear when viewing his pictures of his own system: that is not the heavy blunted-fingered calloused hand of a stone-worker in those pics. Being a stone worker myself, it's pure hell trying to twist thumb-screws on a Tuniq Tower 120 mounted through the Commando's already ott heatsinks with my stubby fingers. Maybe major manufacturers just employ children and elves to assemble their systems.
Anyway, being a neophyte at overclocking I decided to try simple things. Copying a suggestion from a magazine, I raised the multiplier from 11 to 13, went FSB to 277, and 1.55V - and hey presto instant 3.6G. Of course my temps went through the roof (on air) so I put an end to that pretty quick, but it was fun to see the numbers for the fleeting moment. (I used to have a C2D 6600.)
In the guide you intentionally left out Extreme model stats, primarily concentrating on raising FSB frequencies and so on, but I settled to just leaving it at 266 and upping the clock to 12. This results (obviously) in a nice happy 3.2 with no real threat to temps or sanity. My question is rather simple: what's the difference between what I did, and say an FSB of 290 with multi of 11 (or any other mathematical similarity)? The end result seems the same. I did encounter a few times (when experimenting) that while the numerical computation would say the system was pushing 3.4 or so, real world tests showed the system running slower, which may have been the memory out of sync or something. All very confusing. And whats-her-name, Sylvia, Samantha, Sandra, quite happily tells me I'm running 7% above reference, but it just doesn't 'feel' right.
Am I confused? Or can intuition still count for something in this mathematically precise age? Burton's spirit might condemn me for what I bought, but his outlook might applaud my questioning the so-called 'proof' of numerical obstinacy.
Thanks for your time. (And all the suggestions!)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kilmatead
The 19th-century explorer Richard Burton had a decisively negative opinion towards firearms. Not on the grounds of violence, mind you, he was not averse to regular "social altercations", as it were, but simply because they were unsporting. Any woman, child (and these days many do), or adult commoner could fire a gun and win a duel (this is the 19th century) without the slightest skill, forebearing, or (dare it be) 'elan'. He continued throughout his life to adhere to the sword, a man's weapon of choice, as it required training, experience, spirit, and a sort of "earned respect", if you will, to master such a weapon of honour.
This attitude could be moved to the modern by a general distain for those who buy Lamborghini's and Ferrari's without even a driver's license to boast of.
Richard Burton wouldn't have liked me; I'm a newbie with a gun. Don't hate me.
As the proud owner of an admittedly ridiculous QX6800 (running on a Commando), it was just the result of one of those spur-of-the-moment type of days when you have more money than sense, and no girlfriend in sight to tell you not to, if you know what I mean. Ah well, what's done is done.
This has led me thusly to your thread.
I've spent the last week happily reading Clunk's guide, related posts, etc. And I must thank him for even the simplest suggestions about setting memory latencies in the BIOS manually in lieu of just leaving everything to AUTO. I also spent my life's most frustrating day trying to adhere to his suggestions about balancing the heat-sink on the processor for even temps. Ultimately successful (thanks again) all was made clear when viewing his pictures of his own system: that is not the heavy blunted-fingered calloused hand of a stone-worker in those pics. Being a stone worker myself, it's pure hell trying to twist thumb-screws on a Tuniq Tower 120 mounted through the Commando's already ott heatsinks with my stubby fingers. Maybe major manufacturers just employ children and elves to assemble their systems.
Anyway, being a neophyte at overclocking I decided to try simple things. Copying a suggestion from a magazine, I raised the multiplier from 11 to 13, went FSB to 277, and 1.55V - and hey presto instant 3.6G. Of course my temps went through the roof (on air) so I put an end to that pretty quick, but it was fun to see the numbers for the fleeting moment. (I used to have a C2D 6600.)
In the guide you intentionally left out Extreme model stats, primarily concentrating on raising FSB frequencies and so on, but I settled to just leaving it at 266 and upping the clock to 12. This results (obviously) in a nice happy 3.2 with no real threat to temps or sanity. My question is rather simple: what's the difference between what I did, and say an FSB of 290 with multi of 11 (or any other mathematical similarity)? The end result seems the same. I did encounter a few times (when experimenting) that while the numerical computation would say the system was pushing 3.4 or so, real world tests showed the system running slower, which may have been the memory out of sync or something. All very confusing. And whats-her-name, Sylvia, Samantha, Sandra, quite happily tells me I'm running 7% above reference, but it just doesn't 'feel' right.
Am I confused? Or can intuition still count for something in this mathematically precise age? Burton's spirit might condemn me for what I bought, but his outlook might applaud my questioning the so-called 'proof' of numerical obstinacy.
Thanks for your time. (And all the suggestions!)
Are you really C3PO? :lol:
Anyway, performance will be very similar at the same clock speeds regardless of the multiplier. The only benefit that you might see from using a lower multi and higher FSB is that you will have more memory bandwidth, which may or may not benefit you.
As for things not feeling right, well, theres an easy way to tell if things are running right, and thats do an overnight stress test with something like prime95 beta, orthos (if itll run) or 4x SP2004 (and change the affinity yourself).
You might be right though in your suspicion that there is something wrong. As you may have noticed, the more you tinker with things, the more you get a feel for what is going to work, and you can anticipate when something is going to go wrong..sometimes :D
One thing that could possibly be wrong, is that your memory had reached its limit, or possibly you started with the RAM too high?
Post your bios settings, pics will do, and we will see what we can do.
-
i've set my vcore voltage to 1.45 and its stable now at 3.25GHz, does that voltage sound high?
-
Undoubtedly C3PO has more dextrous fingers than I for poking around humming mobos.
My 'problem' (if so it be called) is less physical and more philosophical. I once had a physics professor who banned (on pain of failure) any student from asking a question beginning with "Why". He was quite happy to respond to any query of "How..." because that's what physics does: it describes HOW things work, not WHY they work. I'm having the same trouble with your guide.
I'm only too happy to screw things up. If my computer is running smooth then I'm not learning anything. It's boring. Thanks to your guide I have more "test" programs than I can shake a stick at. Took awhile to figure out at 'affinity' stuff in Prime95, and Sandra is a little over-detailed for beginners (if that's the 'Lite' version what in God's name do you get if you throw money at them?), but not un-useful. Fun, regardless. (Was forced to learn enlightening things about resetting CMOS too, when having too much fun though.)
My memory kept defaulting to 800 (when I know it's PC2 8500C5 1066 capable). So I messed around with the settings - et voila, DDR2 1066 enabled - which I must say did make a decent boost to real world application. I was happy. Incidentally the speeds weren't printed on the chips as per your guide, had to use this interweb thingie to discover 5-5-5-15. Which brings me back to one aspect of my 'problem'.
What the heck do these numbers mean to a beginner? I can grasp that 4-4-4-12 might be "better/faster" than 5-5-5-15 but you go on to suggest things like 4-3-4-8 (or something) and the lights go out. Most people understand that 1066 is 'faster' than 800, fair enough - but abstract latency timings, and WHY they are better, is confusing to newbies at the best of times.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing... I've learned more in the last week from mucking about with your guide than I have in the last year, and I'm all the happier-mind-boggled for it! I merely suggest that in future revisions (you strike me as a personality who loves to revise [that's for the C3PO jab] [smile!]) you don't just say "Now we're going to try this..." without offering some suggestion (i.e. context) as to WHY we should want to as opposed (like me) to just raising the multiplier and accomplishing the same thing. My fuzzy brain is loose on the push-pull relationships involved with this stuff, but we're learning. And don't even get me started on voltages. (Strangely, say for memory, as you suggest to manually set it [mine is rated for 2.2v] the BIOS gets very upset if I try to do this and prints the number in bright red - apparently to scare me off - but it reverts to a pleasant white text up to 1.95v. These things make me reach for more Twix.) Obviously, and unfortunately, you can't be a guru expert on any and all contrasting hardware possibilities, but is a small collegiate treatise upon Latency too much to ask? (Cough.)
Anyway, the struggle continues! (In a Galaxy far, far... oh get off it already.)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bigpun69
i've set my vcore voltage to 1.45 and its stable now at 3.25GHz, does that voltage sound high?
If the temps are ok, and you are happy to run that voltage, then go for it :)
-
just got mine installed, yes its not a go :p
anyhoo on my freezer pro its running cooler than the e2140!!!!, i got some artic silver on her and its idling at 46-48 and thats at 360x9 and 1.4v
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z...umlove/3.2.jpg
hitting 62 under load on orthos, but it only does 2 cores??
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kilmatead
Undoubtedly C3PO has more dextrous fingers than I for poking around humming mobos.
My 'problem' (if so it be called) is less physical and more philosophical. I once had a physics professor who banned (on pain of failure) any student from asking a question beginning with "Why". He was quite happy to respond to any query of "How..." because that's what physics does: it describes HOW things work, not WHY they work. I'm having the same trouble with your guide.
I'm only too happy to screw things up. If my computer is running smooth then I'm not learning anything. It's boring. Thanks to your guide I have more "test" programs than I can shake a stick at. Took awhile to figure out at 'affinity' stuff in Prime95, and Sandra is a little over-detailed for beginners (if that's the 'Lite' version what in God's name do you get if you throw money at them?), but not un-useful. Fun, regardless. (Was forced to learn enlightening things about resetting CMOS too, when having too much fun though.)
My memory kept defaulting to 800 (when I know it's PC2 8500C5 1066 capable). So I messed around with the settings - et voila, DDR2 1066 enabled - which I must say did make a decent boost to real world application. I was happy. Incidentally the speeds weren't printed on the chips as per your guide, had to use this interweb thingie to discover 5-5-5-15. Which brings me back to one aspect of my 'problem'.
What the heck do these numbers mean to a beginner? I can grasp that 4-4-4-12 might be "better/faster" than 5-5-5-15 but you go on to suggest things like 4-3-4-8 (or something) and the lights go out. Most people understand that 1066 is 'faster' than 800, fair enough - but abstract latency timings, and WHY they are better, is confusing to newbies at the best of times.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing... I've learned more in the last week from mucking about with your guide than I have in the last year, and I'm all the happier-mind-boggled for it! I merely suggest that in future revisions (you strike me as a personality who loves to revise [that's for the C3PO jab] [smile!]) you don't just say "Now we're going to try this..." without offering some suggestion (i.e. context) as to WHY we should want to as opposed (like me) to just raising the multiplier and accomplishing the same thing. My fuzzy brain is loose on the push-pull relationships involved with this stuff, but we're learning. And don't even get me started on voltages. (Strangely, say for memory, as you suggest to manually set it [mine is rated for 2.2v] the BIOS gets very upset if I try to do this and prints the number in bright red - apparently to scare me off - but it reverts to a pleasant white text up to 1.95v. These things make me reach for more Twix.) Obviously, and unfortunately, you can't be a guru expert on any and all contrasting hardware possibilities, but is a small collegiate treatise upon Latency too much to ask? (Cough.)
Anyway, the struggle continues! (In a Galaxy far, far... oh get off it already.)
The thing with the memory not setting to 1066Mhz is in the troubleshooting guide here, number 10.
Sandra is there only for the memory bandwidth benchmark. There are some other features that others may find useful, but for the guide, they aren't needed. You can use whichever program you like for testing the bandwidth, it is only to give you an idea as to what is going on, and the best tests are real world applications, and only you know which ones you use the most, and only you can tell if there are any notable real world differences. :)
There are no secrets as to why certain timings work better for some applications, it is just trial and error.
Going back to what was said right at the beginning of the guide regarding no two pieces of hardware being the same, well this is especially true when you look at the bigger picture, the PC as a whole, and add in other factors such as software used, operating system and so on.
Overclocking isn't an exact science, it is about getting the most out of your components, and each person will find benefits and drawbacks from doing some of the steps in the guide.
The suggestion to use 4-3-4-8 is purely an example, and not all RAM will be able to do this, so again, it comes back to doing whatever works best for you.
Regarding the RAM voltage numbers being printed in bright red. This is purely because the JEDEC standard for DDR2 is 1.8v, so by increasing the voltage that much, your bios is screaming at you to turn it down so you dont fry your RAM, but since the JEDEC specs were introduced, there have been advances in performance RAM, and many memory manufacturers now use these higher voltage, higher performance chips.
The JEDEC spec is the reason why your motherboard sees the RAM as PC2-6400. The fastest official spec for DDR2 is PC2-6400, so the motherboard will always default to that speed, however, the RAM is rated to run at PC2-8500 by the manufacturer, but you have to set it manually, along with the timings and voltages.
I hope that answered your questions. :)
-
holy crap cakes!!!!.
booted fine at 385 and umm hit the blue screen of death!.
booted again at 377 just about got into windows..............blue screen again.
is that because of lack of voltage??
its at 365 now :(
sad cos its staying quite cool so it can go some more
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
smellybumlove
holy crap cakes!!!!.
booted fine at 385 and umm hit the blue screen of death!.
booted again at 377 just about got into windows..............blue screen again.
is that because of lack of voltage??
its at 365 now :(
sad cos its staying quite cool so it can go some more
Could be a few things.
Couldn\'t tell you if its lack of voltage until you tell us what voltage/settings you are running :D
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
Could be a few things.
Couldn't tell you if its lack of voltage until you tell us what voltage/settings you are running :D
it was at 1.4250 and regarding settings.... which ones do you refer to?.
i basically followed your guide.
4-4-4-12 ram timings @1.95v
all that stuff in the cpu for power saving etc is disabled.
not sure what else to say:surrender:
-
Im just looking at your system specs, a 370w PSU with an overclocked quad is stretching it a bit, what graphics card do you have?
RAM looks to be well within its limits if it is running at 1:1.
-
well dont laugh....
a msi rx1550, think its a ati x1300 chip!.
its just in there until i get my new 8800 (which is a story in itself!!).
i overclocked the pcie to 111.
-
You dont need the pcie that high, set it to 100 and it should be fine.
You need a bigger sig :lol:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
You dont need the pcie that high, set it to 100 and it should be fine.
You need a bigger sig :lol:
big???.
i thought its pretty small compared to other forums!.
whats the limit here?.
meh its stable at 111 anyway
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
Im just looking at your system specs, a 370w PSU with an overclocked quad is stretching it a bit,
Agreed - you simply don't have the available current with that PSU to be pushing a quad that far at those voltages. The enermax 370W has two +12v rails limited at 14 and 13 amps, respectively. 14A on the CPU rail gives you about 168Watts top and you're trying to draw upwards of 200Watts. You're gonna need a lot better PSU or seriously reduce those vcore voltages.
-
do you think the 8800 gts will push it to far?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
smellybumlove
do you think the 8800 gts will push it to far?
You may be OK if you don't overclock anything.
To be honest, I'm surprised you've got as far as you have with that PSU. Are you stable under full load (Prime/orthos etc) at those speeds/voltages?
-
Also, can you post your "VID" reading from coretemp (or a screenshot of coretemp).
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
smellybumlove
do you think the 8800 gts will push it to far?
you *might* use 280W if you load absolutely everything at the same time.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Phil_P
You may be OK if you don't overclock anything.
To be honest, I'm surprised you've got as far as you have with that PSU. Are you stable under full load (Prime/orthos etc) at those speeds/voltages?
yeah its very stable, i had orthos for 2 hours but it only did 2 cores.
it does suffer v-droop though its a 1.368 on cpu-z, but i set to 1.4 i think
-
Re Orthos, aren't you meant to run two copies & set suitable core affinities in the task manager to get it to push all four cores? NB I'm clueless, tired & have only reead about this OC stuff so far, so you should probably ignore me.
But while I'm here... isn't two hours too short a time to conclude stability?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
smellybumlove
yeah its very stable, i had orthos for 2 hours but it only did 2 cores.
it does suffer v-droop though its a 1.368 on cpu-z, but i set to 1.4 i think
Completely pointless ^^
Use 2x orthos if itll run like the last poster says, or 4xsp2004 and set the affinity for each one manually, or the newest prime95 beta that does it all for you.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
aidanjt
you *might* use 280W if you load absolutely everything at the same time.
The Quad alone can hit 250w when overclocked and overvolted. A factory overclocked GTX is around the 200w mark and more if pushed hard, or around 130-160w for the gts if pushed, and then add on to that whatever else he has.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Right, after repeated attempts to bring my load temps down to a respectable level, I've decided that it might be worth lapping my CPU. Even with everything on stock, it was hitting 55°C under full load, which is madness for a watercooled rig!
The other thing that makes me wonder if my IHS is not flat is that there is about 7°C difference between cores 0 & 1 and cores 2 & 3, which no amount of adjusting the nuts on my heatsink has made any difference to. I remember taking the IHS off my Athlon 64x2, which made a huge difference, not sure if you can do that on a Q6600?
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Same experience as well jez. Orthos 3 hrs @ 3204 stock voltage
OS Vista 32
Idle
C0 38
C1 36
C2 36
C3 39
These are average but do bounce around a little.
Orthos at 3 hrs
C0 55
C1 55
C2 45
C3 45
Somebody like to explain that.
Ortos x 2 renditions affinity set to 2 cores on each.
Air Cooling on Tuniq 120 fan @ 2100 rpm.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
You dont need to lap your CPU, it might give you a couple of c off the temps, but then your warranty is gone.
55c is absolutely fine for a quad core CPU. Think about it, 4 cores, not 1 or 2, but 4, so it is bound to get hot.
So is 55c the hottest core? and the others are 48c?
If I remember right, the IHS is internally soldered.
Did you get a backplate? I cant remember.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
You dont need to lap your CPU, it might give you a couple of c off the temps, but then your warranty is gone.
55c is absolutely fine for a quad core CPU. Think about it, 4 cores, not 1 or 2, but 4, so it is bound to get hot.
So is 55c the hottest core? and the others are 48c?
If I remember right, the IHS is internally soldered.
Did you get a backplate? I cant remember.
Yes, I did get a back plate. 55°C is full load, but NOT overclocked. Running it at 3.284GHz, 1.3v (from CPU-z, can't remember what it is set to in the bios) I am hitting 66°C, read from Coretemp.
Current load temps (overclocked) are:
Core 0: 66°C
Core 1: 66°C
Core 2: 59°C
Core 3: 59°C
p.s. I'm not too worried about the warranty ;)
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Still nothing wrong with those temps.
Its odd that you cant get them more even by tweaking though.
Good luck with the lapping :D
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Or you could send it back under the warranty and say its to hot even with the stock heatsink (might have to pay restocking fees).
Anyway I got bored this morning so Im back to see how far this chip of mine can go so far Ive booted into windows at 425x9, with 1.59v-core and 1.60v on the bridge but isnt stable for long as the boad craps out.
Im going for 400x9 now with 1.50v-core (under load) and 1.55v on the bridge.
Currently idleing at 47c and load under 70c.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fat jez
Yes, I did get a back plate. 55°C is full load, but NOT overclocked. Running it at 3.284GHz, 1.3v (from CPU-z, can't remember what it is set to in the bios) I am hitting 66°C, read from Coretemp.
Current load temps (overclocked) are:
Core 0: 66°C
Core 1: 66°C
Core 2: 59°C
Core 3: 59°C
p.s. I'm not too worried about the warranty ;)
Cheers,
Stephen
Those temps look fine to me.
Sorry - I've not been following closely, but what water cooling do you have. From what I've read, only the very best can handle the heat output of a quad and your temps are right up there with the very best air cooling which seems about right.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Phil_P
Those temps look fine to me.
Sorry - I've not been following closely, but what water cooling do you have. From what I've read, only the very best can handle the heat output of a quad and your temps are right up there with the very best air cooling which seems about right.
D-Tek Fuzion waterblock, Thermochill PA120.3 radiator and an Alphacool DDC pump.
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Nearly there, 385x9 with v-core at 1.50v and northbridge at 1.6v,
Core 1:69c
Core 2:70c
Core 3:69c
Core 4:70c
Should be able to get 450x8 when the X38 Quad gt arrives on my doorstep in october.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fat jez
D-Tek Fuzion waterblock, Thermochill PA120.3 radiator and an Alphacool DDC pump.
Cheers,
Stephen
IMO the modern watercooling gear (even the very best) is operating on it's limits cooling an overclocked/overvolted quad. Probably similar temps to what you'd expect from a top end air cooler (eg, Thermalright 120-Ultra extreme).
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
OK, I finished lapping the IHS and put the Q6600 back in. Load temps are now (overclocked to 3.284GHz, 1.35v):
Core 0: 52-54°C
Core 1: 52-54°C
Core 2: 50-51°C
Core 3: 50-51°C
Definite improvement, I think you'll agree! I'm much happier now :) temps are still creeping up slowly, but I have to wait for the Arctic Ceramique to break down a bit, which should drop them back down again a degree or two.
*edit*
For comparison, here's what they were before:
Current load temps (overclocked) are:
Core 0: 66°C
Core 1: 66°C
Core 2: 59°C
Core 3: 59°C
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Looks much better.
Any chance you could put 1.40v through the v-core and put it under load for a few minutes and let me know the temp you get as Im loading at 60c just wanted to know if it could be improved.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
don't suppose it happens to be a much cooler day (like it is here) than pre lapping (like it was here when you posted that previous temp set)?
Just a thought. Ambient temp makes a huge difference to air and water cooling
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zak33
don't suppose it happens to be a much cooler day (like it is here) than pre lapping (like it was here when you posted that previous temp set)?
Just a thought. Ambient temp makes a huge difference to air and water cooling
Hi Zak,
I checked the load temps before I lapped them and they were a couple of degrees lower than the the ones in the comparison (hottest core was at 63°C), so still a good 9 degrees or so of improvement. Room temp has stayed more or less the same reading the temp of the thermometer on my clock.
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Lets have a look at the temps after a few hours of orthos :D hehe.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
Lets have a look at the temps after a few hours of orthos :D hehe.
LOL, they are still climbing slowly after about 27 iterations of Prime 95 (one per core). I'll leave things as they are and see where they settle. They are still significantly better than they were before I lapped the CPU!
OK, I just played with my nuts some more (fnar) and things are looking good at around the low 50's/high 40's mark.
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Was the IHS very uneven when you lapped it?
I lapped my Thermalright 120-Ultra base, and that was very convex.
BTW, just gotta ask... what's with the pink handbag brigade :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Phil_P
Was the IHS very uneven when you lapped it?
I lapped my Thermalright 120-Ultra base, and that was very convex.
BTW, just gotta ask... what's with the pink handbag brigade :)
I took some pictures while I was polishing it, haven't uploaded them yet. Basically, the edges were where the copper showed first, followed by a point in the very centre, then things spread out from there until the whole of the IHS was copper coloured. So yes, the IHS was concave.
I started of using 280 grit sandpaper, moved up to 600, then 800, then 1000. Don't think I made it onto the 1200 I bought, since I wasn't aiming for a mirror finish.
Didn't you know, it's pink hand bag day today!
See Zak's sig.
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fat jez
I took some pictures while I was polishing it, haven't uploaded them yet. Basically, the edges were where the copper showed first, followed by a point in the very centre, then things spread out from there until the whole of the IHS was copper coloured. So yes, the IHS was concave.
I started of using 280 grit sandpaper, moved up to 600, then 800, then 1000. Don't think I made it onto the 1200 I bought, since I wasn't aiming for a mirror finish.
Didn't you know, it's pink hand bag day today!
See Zak's sig.
Cheers,
Stephen
Thanks! Sounds like lapping certainly evened it out quite a bit. I agree on the mirror finish - not needed - so long as it's relatively flat, thermal paste will do the rest.
I think Clunk has the edge on you with his fluffy little number :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
OK, so she's been cooking for a little while and things aren't quite as good as I had hoped, but still significantly better than they were.
Load temps are:
Core 0: 57°C
Core 1: 56°C
Core 2: 55°C
Core 3: 55°C
So cores 0&1 are about 9-10 degrees better than they were, cores 2&3 are about 4 degrees better. The Arctic Ceramique still has to cure though, which might drop another couple of degrees. The other thing I could do, but don't really want to because of the nuisance and hassle factor, is to lap my waterblock too, which means more or less draining my loop. :(
Might be good for another degree or so though...
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Right after my day of adventures Ive got a suicide shot of 3.8ghz from this morning, and a new 24/7 clock 3.4ghz @ 1.45v-core and 1.50v on the northbridge.
After a couple of hours on orthos it was 60c on every core and the pwm\'s were between 80c~85c,
Overclocked the memory aswell to 1134mhz.
so Im very happy just letting it cool down now before a mamoth attack of BF2142 later tonight.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fat jez
OK, so she's been cooking for a little while and things aren't quite as good as I had hoped, but still significantly better than they were.
Load temps are:
Core 0: 57°C
Core 1: 56°C
Core 2: 55°C
Core 3: 55°C
So cores 0&1 are about 9-10 degrees better than they were, cores 2&3 are about 4 degrees better. The Arctic Ceramique still has to cure though, which might drop another couple of degrees. The other thing I could do, but don't really want to because of the nuisance and hassle factor, is to lap my waterblock too, which means more or less draining my loop. :(
Might be good for another degree or so though...
Cheers,
Stephen
I'd leave it alone at that - looks like a good result :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Hehe, nearly there 7hrs stable at 3.4ghz with 1.46 v-vcore and 1.48v on the north bridge.
Just got to do the memory test tonight, and then try and crack 3.6ghz on Wednesday on my day off, and the 3.8ghz shot, crashes just as I started prime95 oops:O_o1:
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Yep good ol double post sorry guys.
Anyway 24hrs stable with the memory at 1134mhz (2:3 divider), and cpu at 3.4ghz.
Shall be going for 3.6 tomorrow.:mrgreen:
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Thats what my 24/7 ended up as :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Hi all !
First, a big thanks to you for this topic, I learned a lot by reading it. :)
I've got a temp problem on load with my Q6600 (B3), not yet OC (and if I can't resolve the prob, it will never be OC). I put it on an Asus P5k Deluxe, with a Noctua UH12, all of that in an Antec Nine Hundred (the temp of air going out of the case is like the ambiant temp, very good case (but noisy lol !) ).
So on idle, the 4 cores are around 41-44° (I don't have the precise values), that seems normal to me. But on load, the cores temp grows up to 67-71° !! :confused:
First I wonder if there is a relation between idle temps and load temps, as on idle, the temps seem similar to a lot of yours.
Then, I think that it could come from the application of thermal paste I made. I carefully put it on all the correct surface, but then I read on on this thread the method of the "line" application. Have someone photos or links to photos, to see wich quantity is necessary and how the paste must be put in line ? I'm a bit afraid to make a wrong application...
Precision : my OS is XP64, I wasn't able to launch 4 SuperPi at the same time. So I checked the temps (with Coretemp) during a 3dsmax + mental ray rendering (mental ray is a 3d renderer able to generate enough threads to use 100% of the 4 cores)
I hope you can help me a bit to get cooler temps, this pc will used fo 3d rendering, and I would like a lot to speed up my rendering time by overclocking the cpu.
But this thread already learned me a lot, and i thank you again. :thumbsup: and sorry for my english...
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
http://www.arcticsilver.com/pdf/appi..._quad_wcap.pdf
is what you are looking for. I am just in the process (this morning) of putting my Q6600 rig together so I hope that the temp issues are resolvable.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shimrod
Hi all !
First, a big thanks to you for this topic, I learned a lot by reading it. :)
I've got a temp problem on load with my Q6600 (B3), not yet OC (and if I can't resolve the prob, it will never be OC). I put it on an Asus P5k Deluxe, with a Noctua UH12, all of that in an Antec Nine Hundred (the temp of air going out of the case is like the ambiant temp, very good case (but noisy lol !) ).
So on idle, the 4 cores are around 41-44° (I don't have the precise values), that seems normal to me. But on load, the cores temp grows up to 67-71° !! :confused:
First I wonder if there is a relation between idle temps and load temps, as on idle, the temps seem similar to a lot of yours.
Then, I think that it could come from the application of thermal paste I made. I carefully put it on all the correct surface, but then I read on on this thread the method of the "line" application. Have someone photos or links to photos, to see wich quantity is necessary and how the paste must be put in line ? I'm a bit afraid to make a wrong application...
Precision : my OS is XP64, I wasn't able to launch 4 SuperPi at the same time. So I checked the temps (with Coretemp) during a 3dsmax + mental ray rendering (mental ray is a 3d renderer able to generate enough threads to use 100% of the 4 cores)
I hope you can help me a bit to get cooler temps, this pc will used fo 3d rendering, and I would like a lot to speed up my rendering time by overclocking the cpu.
But this thread already learned me a lot, and i thank you again. :thumbsup: and sorry for my english...
Those temps are high for stock settings. I would reapply the thermal paste first and see if that helps.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Yeah thank you, but I already read this well-done pdf... :(
I wonder about the quantity to put, and how to make it in line... I guess it must be equally put, to be equally spread... (the real problem : half seed of rice --> line of rice ! :mrgreen:)
However, I'll try as soon as possible, and tell you if it's better. Thanks again. ;)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Info for Clunk :)
Mostly From Scan:
Q6600 G0 (vid 1.2875)
Gigabyte P35-DS4 motherboard (rev 1.1) - recommended!
Etasis 750W PSU
Crucial Ballistic 2x1GB DDR2-800
256MB 7600GS
Samsung 320GB SATA II
Thermalright Ultra-120 extreme with Scythe 120mm 1600rpm fan
Motherboard BIOS (F4) supports G0 out of the box and boots up fine with memory at default 1.8v (detected SPD using slower timings).
Running 8x400=3.2GHz, 1.35vcore set in the bios, open build on the bench.
Some vdroop, reading 1.296 under load (1.31 idle) in cpuz.
Temps are EXCELLENT, 39-44C under load at 20C room temp :)
I've not really played with it yet, just went straight in at that speed and have been running SETI ever since. She's rock solid stable so far and I'd recommend all of the above.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Thanks Phil, I'll add the cooler and the board now :)
Anyone else want to add a recommendation?
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
I've just got my new Q6600 G0 and have been running it at 2970GHz (330x9) for a few minutes after having tweaked the HSF to get all cores at roughly the same temp. I am using Orthos to stress test (two instances with affinity for each process set to two different cores).
While this is fine for the Small FFT test, it does not work for blend test as one process gobbles up all the RAM (2 GB in total), and the other just stays in initialization phase. Is it possible to do Blend test on all four cores ?
PS. Once I have done some more testing/tweaking, I will post some more information.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
OK, She's currently running 3.51GHz with a load temp of 67°C, which I don't think is too clever (plus Nero Home just quit on me, which makes me think it's not too stable). Prime 95 is still running though.
What do you reckon, leave it as it is or drop things down a little?
dagnabbit, it just blue screened on me.
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
I've got 44/45/43/44 idle on mine
Hard burn with 4 copies of Orthos, 1 per core gives me
69/69/65/65 after 10 hours
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
You dont need to do 4x orthos mate, just grab the new prime95.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Thanks for the link also. Got my bits arriving later today, touch wood, so will be revisiting all these threads over the next few days as I alternate beween breaking stuff & panicking :)
Edit: Don't suppose you have a link to info on vsn 25.4? The Whats New I found only goes to 24.14.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Have a look on their forums, theres a post about it :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
I didn't check forums...
25.3
25.4
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
If anyone has any hardware info for me to add, please feel free to post it.
Coolers, motherboards, waterblocks, general info and maybe some handy utilities that you might think worth a look :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Q6600 B3
P5K-E Wifi
Freezer Pro
4xOCZ PC-2 6400
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Probe2 says my CPU temp is only 53oC yet CoreTemp's saying 65/65/61/62 running Prime 95 on 3 cores and F@H GPU on the 4th to hammer the whoel system, deffo need to sort the fans out as Probe is showing me the following..
CPU Temp 53
MB Temp 52
VCore 1.24
CPU Fan 1577
+12 12.15
+3.3 3.26
+5 4.97
Chassis 1 753
Chassis 2 11842
Chassis 3 767
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Hello, thinking about my temps
Q6600 Zalman 9700
P5k
2x1 corsair 800
Overcloked it yesterday to 3Ghz, 1.28vcore
Temps on core temp was 51 51 45 46
What can be solution to make temps all the same on both pairs of cores, or close to each other ?
Without lapping,
thanks
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
F3rAL
Hello, thinking about my temps
Q6600 Zalman 9700
P5k
2x1 corsair 800
Overcloked it yesterday to 3Ghz, 1.28vcore
Temps on core temp was 51 51 45 46
What can be solution to make temps all the same on both pairs of cores, or close to each other ?
Without lapping,
thanks
Please read the first post in this thread.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
[GSV]Trig
Q6600 B3
P5K-E Wifi
Freezer Pro
4xOCZ PC-2 6400
Thanks, will add those now :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
[GSV]Trig
Probe2 says my CPU temp is only 53oC yet CoreTemp's saying 65/65/61/62 running Prime 95 on 3 cores and F@H GPU on the 4th to hammer the whoel system, deffo need to sort the fans out as Probe is showing me the following..
CPU Temp 53
MB Temp 52
VCore 1.24
CPU Fan 1577
+12 12.15
+3.3 3.26
+5 4.97
Chassis 1 753
Chassis 2 11842
Chassis 3 767
Dont use Probe for CPU temps, its miles off. Its ok for voltages and maybe the motherboard temp.
Stick to coretemp or speedfan (add 15c to the temps).
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
speedfan (add 15c to the temps).
You can configure speedfan to add an offset to individual temps. :)
That's what I did to save me disabling the driver checking on boot up each time. I've run it along side coretemp often enough to know that adding 15° is accurate enough.
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Yep, but not everyone knows that it isnt accurate to begin with :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
Yep, but not everyone knows that it isnt accurate to begin with :)
Very true!
Incidentally, I've got mine running at 3.4GHz. Any higher seems to need silly amounts of Vcore to be stable and the temps are well into the 60's - too high for my liking.
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Mine levels out at around 3.5Ghz, so its pretty normal, and when you consider the heat that they produce, its not bad really. :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Clunk
Mine levels out at around 3.5Ghz, so its pretty normal, and when you consider the heat that they produce, its not bad really. :)
Yep, I'm not going to turn my nose up at a 1GHz overclock :D
Cheers,
Stephen
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Clunk zalman 9700 has just 2 nuts, or I did something worng ?
plate that holds heat sink is mounted vertically so I have one screw on top and one at the bottom, so I can't control sides.
What do you think ?
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Sorry, I thought that the Zalman coolers had a backplate with 4 screws at the corners?
If not, theres not much you can do about it :)
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Add 15 to the coretemp as well or jsut speedfan?
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Quote:
Originally Posted by
F3rAL
OK, I see.
Is it possible to get a screwdriver to any of the 4 screws that hold the black bracket down after the heatsink is in place?..if so, have a go at tweaking them a bit? Same for the two that hold the heatsink on.
Other than that, I think you are out of luck.
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
I think I'll get one more metal plate, and will put on the one I have now, and I think i will be able to put 4 screws and then maybe adjust them the way I want :/
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
/jumps up & down
It's here, IT'S HERE :woowoo: :woowoo:
I'll be back in a depressed state later when I break something...
PS What, no :woot:?
-
Re: Quad Core Thread: Overclocking, Cooling, Motherboards, Troubleshooting & General
Good luck, don't go to far :)