The Official OC (OverClocking) Thread!

ck: Lol, I've no need for the watercooling rig, I've overclocked my single card higher than that using the reference cooler it comes with, and at nowherenear full fan speed (55%). The reason for the high score though is the 4.5Ghz 45nm Quad. With a 3.15Ghz 65nm Duo I'm not going to be pulling anywhere near that score. I was hoping for a guide on how to overclock the cards independently in overdrive, I'm sure it can be done that way.

 

fair enough. i remeember the Athalon 64s being removed constantly, by a lto of people....i didnt take that risk

 

once cf is enabled in catalyst, you can go into the overdrive panel where there is a drop down that allows you to overclock the cards independently

I had my core upto 935mhz with the fan @ 65% too noisey for my liking , getting a duo orb for it so will be able to do that nice and quietly, got another card on the way , just deciding on what mobo / cpu combo now and a higher rated psu, have another £700 dissposable cash so im looking forward to gaming when i get it clocked up. reverted back to the origonal bios now as 8.3 cat is glitchy and has some issues in cod4, so lso back on 8.2 cat.

 

If I were you, I wouldn't bother with the Duorb. It won't be very quiet, and it's cooling performance will be adequate, but not exemplary. Get an HR-03GT with a decent 92mm fan on it like a Nexus. THEN you'll be able to overclock your card quietly.

Do you have a pair of 3870s running then or did you look this up?
If you do, would you mind telling me what games you run and how they do?

 

Who has a new Q9450 on the way? What about any good lab overclock reviews yet? How are you guys doing on the E8500 yet to play with.

Clock On!

 

I binned my order as the reviews of it tested side by side with the Q6600 showed no real gain to be had.

 

Interesting. Is this purely on the basis that the Q6600 overclocks further without going into the voltage danger zone? Or is it really the case that clock for clock the Q9450 isn't much faster? I was considering getting a Q9450 at the end of summer since they're so expensive, but if I'd do just as well with a Q6600 it may be far sooner than that...

 

At the rapidly dropping prices of the Q6600, I'd just get that if I were you. They have the ability to hit 3.6 on air. That's fast and you'll never even use all that power (unless bruteforcing passwords xD)

 

Well that's the thing, I've owned my E4300 for over a year and its lasted me quite well, still is. I don't want to get a Quad core that will end up massively outclassed in a short period of time because I can't afford to spend that much money on something that's soon replaced. Remember, I don't want to have high CPU temps, and I don't want to have a huge power usage, as it will ruin my nice quiet PC, but I do want to get sufficient performance to forget about my CPU being a frame rate limit in modern games.

 

This shows some basic stats between the two CPUs running at 3.6GHz each.
The main area of gain is in the power and heat (hardly a surprise).
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=173287

I am presuming that anyone looking at either CPU on this thread is looking to overclock it (hence title of this thread).

Looking at the two CPUs at stock speed is not going to show much other than the obvious, as the Q9450 is 2.66GHz compared to the 2.4Ghz of the Q6600, and then there is the cache size difference.

Other than that the main gain will come with SSE4 compliant applications, which should so quite a gain in performance over SSE3.

If I was buying one now I would probably go for the Q9450 over the Q6600, as it is slightly better in performance, runs cooler and uses less power.

I do however already have the Q6600 which runs 24/7 at 3.6-3.8GHz mood dependant, so for me there is no gain.

There are quite a few people that will be expection 4+GHz out of the Q9450, but that is very unlikely for most people, as they will struggle to get 500FSB stable. 3.6GHz should be pretty easy for most people, so you still get a good OC on your CPU, it then comes down to % gain to had compared to % price difference, with the Q9450 prices having increased recently making the difference up to +70% with a performance gain of about 15-20% when possible, it makes no sense to get the Q9450.

 

"the only difference was the the Q9450 vcore was 1.3volts whereas the Q6600 was 1.45volts" - is 1.3 the stock Vcore for the 9450? If it's managed to get from 2.66 to 3.6 at stock voltage that's great news, as based on what I've heard, I'm not going to be touching the voltage if I get a 9450. I doubt I'll be pushing much above 3.6Ghz on a Q6600 because of the power drain, and if the 9450 will be faster than a 50% OC on the 6600 without even touching the volts, I'm far more sold on the 9450 than before. It's time to save up...

 

but with only an 8x multi, clocking wont be two gr8

 

Um, you didn't read the link BigDK posted did you? it shows you right there how well they overclock.

 

no... xD

but to get them to 4GHz, (thats what i menat) the FBS woudl ave to remain stable at 500FBS, and with voltages being weird on the penryns i doubt it will do that.
for 4GHZ the Q9550 would be better

 

4Ghz isn't achievable with the Q6600 on a sensible voltage either or so I've read, so unles you buy a very expensive CPU indeed, 4Ghz with a Quad isn't achievable on a daily basis by any means - it speaks volumes that a comparative expert like BigDK only runs 3.6-3.8 on it. Given the innate performance benefits of the Q9450, 3.3Ghz or so should roughly equate to 3.6 on a Q6600, and that seems relatively easy to achieve with barely any voltage increase, if at all (I'm not quite sure yet, I'd be loathed to even go near the voltage for a 45nm).

 

sam it seems smart for you to get a newer cpu (Q9450) because of your TEMP demands. I'm sure the Q6600 is cheaper and will continue to go that route but knowing how you run your system it only makes sense to get something with less power draw and potentially less heat. I also agree on NOT pushing the newer cpu's vcore. I've seen to many problems or issues concerning just that. I know there's some sort of learning curve with new components and one or more of our members have gone thru that curve with having to RMA components unfortunately. Thank goodness for warranties right?? lol.

....gm

 

Haha, well indeed. Tell me, in the US do you get a legally mandatory 12 month retail warranty with all products like we do in the UK?

 

It should be fine. And when I get mine , I'll be more then happy to test and see. Afterall, I only use the *x even on my old Q6600. So Q9450 should be able to if anything keep up with , if not pass the Q6600 by a notch. Mine and 2 of my m8tz early Q6600 have done daily 480x8 on air. And yes 4GHz on air at either 500 or 450 FSB is realistic. Now as for daily use, thats up to you and how well you like it's performance, or the heat. I found very little vcore difference from 4GHz as 450x9 v/s 500FSB to make a big deal of it.

But in the end, I stuck w/ 480x8 as daily user for 3.8GHz on air and only 1.488v It has been a year, but if it dies like so many claim it will, then I shell have my new Q9450 to play with by then. And I will have got my fun out of it anywayz. Otherwise, it would be like building a race car only to cruise it on a smooth city avenue just so it can save on tires and last 50yrs. Lol!

The big issues with the so called FSB limit is partly the mobo in use. Too many use a mobo not capable of tweaking FSBT, PLL, or GTL_Ref, so this becomes your wall, not the CPU as much. Also a lot just jump str8 for the clocks and max RAM on a divider so newver really know the bottleneck.

I know this is more for advance overclocking, but some of us will end up there sooner if not later.

As for 4GHz, I'm still daily on 500x8 on my E6750 for 9 months now (P35), 6 months @ 5:6 DDR1200 as daily workstation and on new X38. So YES, for those interested, 4GHz is easily obtainable today and may only get better.

Good Clockin' To You!

 

Alright a update on my PC hardlocking woes. I have test the two sticks of RAM in the PC at the time of the hardlocks with memtest86 for runs of 21-24 hours with no errors. And I have run the DriveCleaner software as instructed by its readme. I haven't had any lockups yet so thats a good sign. We'll just have to see how things go. Also could the DIMM Slot being used for testing affect anything?

 

NuckNFuts,

Certain CPUs have been known to cause "Black Hole" problems. I guess the most notorious CPU for that, is the E4300. Some motherboards like the P5N-E had serious issues with that CPU and black holes! I didn't experience the problem at all with the GA-965P-DS3 Rev. 1.33 with my E4300. Same thing when I switched to the P35-DS3R Rev. 1.0 board and it's replacement, a rev. 2.0. When I got the E6750 for it it worked equally well! I've seen a grand total of "1" BSOD and no Black Holes with the last 3 motherboards, and that was one that UPS delivered to the wrong address and someone who didn't know what they were doing, messed the setup all up, trying to use the motherboard! I completely cleared the bios by removing the battery and jumpering the CMOS short pins. Haven't seen a BSOD, or a black hole since! All I ever get is a system shutdown if I try to push too hard, which flips the CPU and memory settings to auto, and re-boots. All the numbers remain but you have to turn both back to manual to turn them back on, and try again!

Best Regards,
Russ