which Core2 was it specifically that allowed amazing overclocking ?

[Tunnah]

sorry for asking a question which could probably be found by searching but hitting a wall

Which E-series was it that could OC better than the rest ? was it the 8200 or the 8400 ? and was it a specific batch or generally all of them with a bit of luck ?

[Behemoth]

From what I've read ovr various forums it seems that the E8400 was the champion overclocker, as to what batch I have no idea sadly.

[Tunnah]

thanks mate

[kingpotnoodle]

sorry for asking a question which could probably be found by searching but hitting a wall

Which E-series was it that could OC better than the rest ? was it the 8200 or the 8400 ? and was it a specific batch or generally all of them with a bit of luck ?

They are all pretty good... and on a budget the new E5200 and the E7x00 are great value for money. Less cache but the lower starting FSB speeds (and consequently higher multiplier) make it easier if you're on a medium priced motherboard which can't hit super-high FSB speeds.

[moogle]

Yep it was the E8400 series that could easily hit 4GHz on air. I really haven't seen many overclocked ones running under that speed unless if the people who got a bad one didn't post about it

[Hawker1986]

As said they were all quite good, even dating back to the original E6xxx, I got my E6400 to 3.2ghz without even breaking a sweat. Recently ive put a machine for my cousin using a cheapo P31 mobo and an E5200 and got that to 3.75Ghz in 2mins. E8400 is an amazing overclocker though, probably the best of the lot.

Hawker

[Salazaar]

As said they were all quite good, even dating back to the original E6xxx

Ahem, I think you'll find that the E4300 was (and still is <--- 1.8Ghz to 3.2Ghz) a great overclocker as well.

[Hyperviper34]

The E2140 was the first monster (for me anyway) by going from 1.6 (default 200fsb x 8)) to 3.2 (400) and running day in day out at 2.66 (333), The E7200 was next - 2.5 (266x9.5) to 3.8 (400), although I have seen (but not experienced) the 7200 at 4+. Isn't the Q6600 Go a bit of a monster clocker?

[HSK]

Yea the Q6600 G0 stepping was one which was often recommended for its overclocking potential, well at least 3.4 Ghz on air? (I think, although I never took mine that high, mine was about 3.1 Ghz on stock cooler).

[dave87]

Yup the SLACR Q6600 was meant to be a goodun.

Mines up to 3.1 no problem, haven't bothered trying further.

[Technogeek]

Yes i have my Q6600 at 3.1 on air with no problems, did push it up further but I had problems with core voltages.

[Meaker]

I have a Q6600 SLACR 1.2375v on ebay under meaker10 at the moment, does 3.6ghz at 1.4v.

[jimborae]

My Q6600 GO runs 24/7 @ 3.6ghz and will bench @ 3.9ghz on water.

[Hawker1986]

Ahem, I think you'll find that the E4300 was (and still is <--- 1.8Ghz to 3.2Ghz) a great overclocker as well.

I thought the E6xxx pre-dated the E4xxx, im not knocking them I know they overclocked excellently too, just the E6xxx were the original C2D CPUs (or am I wrong about that)

Hawker

[moogle]

I thought the E6xxx pre-dated the E4xxx, im not knocking them I know they overclocked excellently too, just the E6xxx were the original C2D CPUs (or am I wrong about that)

Hawker

They do and are the original C2D's.

[TooNice]

How are Q6600 these days? Still good clockers or have AMD somehow tightened the binning process?