E7400 Overclock Help

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

SippyCupXIII

Distinguished
Aug 25, 2008
56
0
18,630
Hey All,

I recently just purchased a new computer and was maybe looking into doing some overclocking and not sure what I should be aiming for. I am not trying to push it to the max or nothing but from looking around and different sites and 3.5ghz seems to be pretty achievable for a lot of people. Here is my system specs:


Operating System: Windows XP 32bit with SP3
Motherboard: MSI P7N SLI Platinum
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo e7400
Video Card: 1gb EVGA Geforce GTS 250
Memory: 4gb G.Skill DDR2 pc6400
Sound Card: VIA Envy24 HF
Hard Drive: 80gb/500gb(x2) Western Digital IDE
Power Supply: Thermaltake 450watt TR2 RX Cable Management W0146RU

Processor Heatsink: RocketFish RF-UCPUCF
Processor Temp: 25C idle, 36C load


So what do you guys think? What should be a good clock to aim for? If I was to get 3.5ghz I would probably OC my graphics card and such as well. What type of performance increase would I be looking at? Also if I could have any help on some general settings to change for the OC and what not would be awesome!

Thanks!
Chris Stickles
 
Hey All,

I got a update on the OC. After not as much tweaking as I expected I am currently running my e7400 at 3.5ghz (333x10.5 1.26v). It has been running Prime95 for about 19 hours so far and seems to be holding strong. The temp is staying right at 49-52C according to a few different temp monitors. I was first wondering if I should try Orthos after this as well? I didnt know if most people run both or shiuld I just assume it is stable after 24 hours of Prime95?

Now to move on, from what I have found around the web my voltage seems a lot lower than most other people running at same/similar speeds. And I havent even tried to lower the voltage than what it is. I just upped it to that when I started OC'ing and left it, so I am sure I might be able to lower the voltage and keep it stable and even get it running a little bit cooler.

Now here is my question, since I seem to be fine as far as the heat and great for voltage, you guys think I should leave it or maybe try for 4.0ghz? I ask because like I said, a lot of other people around the web that are running 3.5ghz with different fsb and multi. setups and seem to have to have their voltage around 1.30 or above, and that is with the voltage tweaked at the lowest possible voltage that is stable. Like I said, I havent messed with the voltage at all as far as lowering it to see if it is stable at lower voltages. So should I try for 4.0ghz?

Another thing that I want to consider is will I really see that much of a difference in perfomance? I know that 500mhz is 500mhz. But I ask with my system setup, is my graphics card going to be a bottleneck for the processor if I can hit 4.0ghz? Same thing with the ram, but once I get the processor where I want it and stable, I plan on OC'ing the ram as well. I have Memtest86 to stress the ram after OC.

I know that I dont have the top of the line graphics card by any means. I ran Crysis last night and with the processor at 3.5ghz and my graphics card OC'ed some, I was seeing about a 5 to 15fps increase given the situation during gameplay at high settings and 1920x1080 than I was with no OC. Also, with the benchmark, I ran an average of 34.45fps at high settings and 1680x1050, now I am running basically the same average (maybe .xx off) at high settings and 1920x1080. I also plan to run FurMark and rthdribl to make sure my graphics card OC is stable.

Another thing is by the end of the year at the lastest I plan on getting another gts 250 and sli them with a new power supply. I also might pick up another 4gb of ram once Windows 7 comes out to give me 8gb. (know it is not needed though). So should this play into me just being happy with 3.5ghz right now, and then once I get the other graphics card and new poer supply, try for 4.0ghz?

Any help and suggestions on this would be awesome. So just a review of my questions:


- Should I try to lower my voltage and retest if the system goes right now, 24 hours fine on Prime95?

- Should I try to run Orthos as well?

- If Prime95 checks out, should I try for 4.0ghz or wait untill I get another gts 250 and new power supply?

- Will the perfomace gain as my system sits right now be worth running the processor at 4.0ghz (gpu or ram bottleneck)?


Thanks for any info guys!
Chris Stickles
 
Hey All,

Ok, I didnt get any info but I have been working at it still. I have decided not to try for 4.0ghz. It isnt worth it, like I said, maybe when I get another gts 250 and power supply I might try but not at the moment.

My settings were stable running Prime95 for 24 hours. However, I discovered that my bios had a update available so I flashed it to the new version. Upon this I noticed with no changed to the bios settings that CPUZ said my voltage on the processor was 1.4v. So I am not sure if my motherboard was just reading the voltages wrong or what but I am retesting Prime95 at 1.3v (+.05v from default in bios settings) as we speak. I attempted it with no added voltage but it failed within an hour. It has been going about 4 hours now with no errors or warnings. I might try to lower it if it test stable but according to a couple different temp. monitors, the cores are only running at 61C at max, with the case temp much lower.

But then I was thinking, I was looking into CPUZ and noticed that my FSB : DRAM ratio is 5:6. I then did some research online and found that techinically running 1:1 gives the best results. So I am wondering what would be the best setup:


current: 333x10.5=3.5ghz (5:6 FSB : DRAM)

thinking: 400x9=3.6ghz (1:1 FSB : DRAM)


So my question is, what would be the better setting to use? If I do change to the new setting, would I really notice a preformance increase? Any Info would be Awesome!

Thanks!
Chris Stickles
 
i would aim for the higher FSB setting.as it will bring you a higher overall performance increase.

here is what i achieve with my E7300
3DMark%20Vantage-Performance.jpg
 
iluvgillgill,

Those are nice clock settings, I am not looking to push mine quite that much though. I want to stay within the recommended voltages for my processor. I just dont want to take the chance of drastically lowering the life span on my processor. I will have to benchmark both options and see if I see an increase in running games and make a decision. Thanks for the info! Any other suggestions are welcome!

Thanks!
Chris Stickles
 
Hey All,

Well, I tried both settings that I had listed before and ran Prime95 for 12 hours a piece with no problems. Ran the Crysis benchmark with basically no difference (maybe .xx) in fps. Same for in-game play. I am assuming that it is just my graphics card is maxed out. I tired to lower just the shaders to medium and got a really nice bump in fps (min of 40 during gamplay opposed to 26).

I will have to settle with what I got now, and I am happy with the performance for the price I spent. (a lot better than my single core, ddr1, agp system that I did have). I can play basically any other game maxed out that I own with no problems. I will be getting 1 or 2 more gts 250's (might switch for a different card if I can find someone to buy my gts 250 when I need to upgrade) and a new power supply by the end of the year.

I have decided to go with the 400x9 setting since it is 100mhz faster and the FSB : Dram ratio is 1:1. I didnt have to raise the voltage any so why not. Any other info/suggestions would still be welcome though!

Thanks!
Chris Stickles
 
Nice post....I a newb in overclocking and can't seem to find the FSB setting from 266. I see the FSB 1066 setting but nothing for the CPU in BIOS. Not sure what to do next. I changed the FSB to 1333 and multiplri to 10 and system locked up right away. My BIOS verison is 1.1. Any help would be sweet!! I was hoping to get some more out of the E7400 set at 2800.

Vista 64 bit
Core Duo E7400
XFX 7501 Mobo
8 gig ram - fatality dual channel 1066mhz

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom