My first OC! Is this OK?...

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
Just did my first cpu OC. I'm not a noob with computers or hardware, in fact I built this one myself, I just never OC'ed before because I had been using Intel boards and liked stability, plus I couldn't take even the slightest chance of something going wrong. I had no problem just upgrading my cpu, selling off my old, when I needed a power fix.
Not to mention with how hot the pre-C2D cpu's were running, spending $$ on cooling was something I didn't want to do, aside from getting a good case and a good $30 HSF just for stock clocks.

Anyhow, it felt great to OC something other than my graphics card!
My specs are in my sig, working with e6600 and DS3 board. I used the Gigabyte DS3 overclocking guide, which that thread is now locked and I don't know why. Was stickied, great guide for a noob!

I mostly followed everything that guide said. Except I didn't try for a 350 FSB OC right off the bat plus the cpu in the guide was an e6300 w/7x multiplier, I have the e6600 w/9x.
The FSB I tried was 333. The only other thing in the guide I didn't follow was upping my DDR2 voltage since my goal was to get a decent OC (and being a noob I think going from 2.4 to 3.0ghz is decent for sure) without upping any voltages, which I accomplished.
Plus, while the guide said to loosen timings of RAM to 5-5-5-15, my Mushkin DDR2-800 timings were already 5-5-5-18. So I actually tightened the Tras to 15.

Now I don't know if doing that makes changing the ddr2 voltage more important, less important, or maybe it doesn't matter.
If this isn't the right way to go about this then somebody please let me know and I'll change it. And I'm not against changing voltages if I need to, if it means more stability.
But then again, like I said I only went for a 333 FSB instead of 350.

So I restarted the computer, everything booted fine, went into windows fine. Temps were still good and my new timings stuck on the RAM according to CPU-Z. And my OC was successful now getting a 3.0ghz cpu!

When I first got the board, it had the F10 bios. My cpu temp idle was as low as 20c. A few days back I upgraded to the F12 bios where my idle was around 30c. What a difference! These were windows readings. In the F10 bios, rather than 20c I was seeing like 25c. With the F12 bios rather than 30c I was seeing like 36c.
So I've seen my cpu temps all over the place. And that sucks because I don't know which reading is right, or which bios has the more accurate readings. Does anybody know?

Regardless, I still have yet to see my cpu temp really get much above 40c under full load for about 30 minutes with the new overclock, so I think I'm in good shape. Temps in general only rose on the cpu a few degrees with the OC, and the SYS temp only up 1 degree. It idle's around 40c now. I did the "touch test" with my northbridge. It is barely even warm! I can hold my finger on it all day long.
This is a good thing, right?

I still have yet to do a long torture test, but I will get to that. I'm thinking I will have no problems. If not, I'm thinking about getting greedy and upping the FSB to 350!
However, before I do that I just wanted to run this past any of you more experienced people. Would like to hear from at least one person that can tell me if what I did so far is OK. Mainly with how I tightened the timings rather than loosen (just the tras) and how I didn't change any voltage.

So, what do you think? Assuming I pass the torture test, of course.
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
Yeah, I have TAT, and CoreTemp. They all read the same as far as the windows reading. By windows reading I mean all the software progs that read temp, everything but the bios.
Yeah, everest, the gigabyte tool, TAT, CoreTemp, pretty much all read the same.
So are those what I should go by? I hope those are the accurate reading as my bios reads like 4 or 5 degrees higher.

Also, what bios do you have? Did you have the same problem as me with the huge temp difference. Even with the software progs using the F10 bios, they were giving me 10c cooler readings than they do now. With the F12 bios, 10c warmer in windows. Same thing in the bios as well, but with the readings being again a few degrees higher in the bios than what I get in windows.
Again, either way I'm not too concerned because the temps aren't too hot.
But even TAT read 10c lower temps with the F10 bios.

Anyhow, you obviously OC with the DS3. Did I do everything OK? Was it OK that I tightened the tras (from 18 to 15) and didn't change DDR2 voltage? Is 333 FSB a number that could cause problems? If my temps are good, should I go for 350 FSB or beyond?
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
OK, I know I wanted to wait to hear from someone to see if what I was doing with my RAM timings and not changing voltages was OK to do as long as things were stable.

Couldn't help myself, and I'm bored. So I went ahead and tried for 350 FSB anyhow.
Also, I learned that although my Mushkin EM6400 RAM is listed on the RAM as having 5-5-5-18 timings, that is only listed there because of some Jdec standard or something.
After some reading, I learned that the real timings were 5-5-5-12, which is also what they were listed as when I bought them.

So by changing tras to 15, I in fact was loosening my timings.
Then I also read another OC guide that said that as long as your RAM speed is higher than your FSB overclock that it might be best to use your normal timings and voltage with a moderate OC.
Since I am now considering my RAM as being 5-5-5-12 by default (disregarding that whole jdec standard thing), those are the timings I used this time since my rated RAM speed is 1600mhz and my FSB is now 1400mhz. RAM is still higher, so I'm going by what somebody else said about not messing with the RAM timings or voltage.

Wasn't sure how this would work out. Anyhow, I booted up at 350 FSB, standard RAM timings, and no voltage adjustments.
Everything so far is fine.
Temps at idle still good, same as the 333 fsb overclock.
I'm running the stress test now, after a half hour I'm seeing the cpu temp flirting with 50c, but I don't think it has hit 50c yet.

Am I correct to assume that 50c - 55c after a couple hours of full load testing is OK?
I've heard 60c is probably the highest you want to see, so I think I'm still in good shape.
My alarm is set to 70c but I can't imagine hitting that. The temps I'm getting now are with the middle of summer being here as well.

Anyhow, I'm more than happy here. Reaching a 350 FSB on basic air cooling and no other voltage or memory adjustments.
I am curious though. One thing I noticed is that stepping is gone. This is normal right? I think I disabled it in the bios. Kind of sucks that the cpu won't be throttled down like it was a stock and will always be running at 3.15ghz because I really don't play games that often to need the OC. Wish there was a way to just have all my OC bios settings kick in only when I start a game, but I'm pretty sure that is impossible.

I also noticed, which is good, that my one bios settings is running my RAM 1:1 with my FSB automatically, no matter where I set the FSB. That is pretty cool.
Then I also noticed that means my RAM is operating at 350mhz rather than 400mhz.
So now I'm wondering if I could drop RAM timings below standard since it is operating at below standard speeds?
However, I won't mess with that, I think everything is OK as it is.

I hope everything I'm doing so far is OK.
 

Annisman

Distinguished
May 5, 2007
1,748
0
19,810
9
wow....thanks for the novel! but seriously it sounds liek you are having fun which is a good thing. From what I can tell you are doing things properly. I just Overclocked my E6600 for the first time a little bit ago. Managed to hit 3.2 Ghz with a Zalman 9700. Anythin after 3.2 makes my computer totally unstable....even when I up the voltages..strange. I think I am running it at 1.5 voltage. Kinda high, but my 9700 keeps it relatively cool. Keep experimenting with your overclock even if you dont play games often, it;s nice to know how far you can push it when that time comes! Good luck
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
Yeah I am having some fun with it. Plus I am still running into some things I would like answers for, but I guess all that is important is that I know the basics and that everything seems stable. So far so good, at least.

Was definitely excited to not only get my ram timings where they should have been by lowering the tRAS by 5, but still being able to clock higher yet without changing default voltages.
So getting 3.15ghz with that definitely made me happy, I wasn't expecting that, especially without needing to spend a dime for better cooling.
All benchmarks (including for the RAM, hard drive, and even graphics processing) have increased, even if only a little due to the higher clock on the cpu. And of course the cpu benchmarks themselves are showing the increase they should.

It does sound like I might be near the limit as far as how high I can go without changing voltages or ram timings. 3.2ghz does sound like the fine line before you need to start altering that stuff. And that is pretty much where I am at with 3.15. It sure seems like I can go higher yet, but I'll stick with this for now. And I can probably go much higher if I start upping the voltages.
Under full stress for a good hour I did hit 50c after about 15 minutes, but surprisingly from that point on it never went further, and occasionally dropping a few degrees.

So it is nice to know that when the time comes (like a geforce 8 graphics card), that I'll be able to push further and I have headroom with the temps. I'd also maybe like to get cheap north/south bridge fans, whether I need them or not, just to be safe.
But for now, I think this awesome cpu at 3.15ghz is plenty enough to bring out the full power of games alongside my 7900gt OC'ed. Going much further I'm thinking might start making my graphics card a bottleneck if it hasn't already.
Not sure if that is correct logic or not, but I have to think that I am around the point where any additional higher clocks won't do a whole lot but get me nice benchmarks.

As much as I'd like to keep pushing and experimenting, I think I had my fun and already accomplished more than I thought I would. Before the OC I seriously figured I would be happy if I could get 2.8ghz and 3.0ghz would simply be awesome. So to get 3.15ghz has been a treat.
Perhaps soon, down the road, I might push to 415 FSB or something like that, even if I need to buy a couple cheap north/south bridge fans I'm fine with that.
So it is also nice to already know I can go higher, maybe a lot higher, when I feel like it.

My logic is that if I get my max overclock right away, then I'll be tempted to spend even more money I don't have like a year from now on another new cpu. But if I settle for what I have now for a few months, then push it a little more every few months, it will be kind of like buying a new cpu all the time for free!
I think that is good logic, at least for somebody like myself gets the urge to upgrade but is on a tight budget. Like I said, this will keep me from being another cpu so soon.

Lastly, I do think I got lucky getting a good C2D and board. For one thing, I know the new C2D chips don't OC as well, some can't even get past 3.2ghz even with better cooling than what I have and using the same or better board.
My e6600, which I've had for a week now, is labeled 2005 on it! That is an old C2D!
Then the hot northbridge issue that some people have with the DS3, I don't have.
I did the touch test before and after the OC, even at full load. At idle, I swear the heatsink feels lukewarm at best, I could lay my head down on it and fall asleep for the night!
And OC'ed under full load, still I can keep my finger on it all day, it is maybe a little warmer than at idle.

So yeah, I'm definitely happy and got myself some solid products!
 

Zorg

Splendid
May 31, 2004
6,732
0
25,790
1
Rob, you are hired. I couldn't even take the the time to read your 500 word posts. If you are looking for a job, your in. If you want help, then consider distilling you're concerns into the most concise post possible. I really can't comment on content because I stopped reading at the beginning.

Edit: Grammar/punctuation, I was a little frustrated.
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
0
If you have an E6600 then you can change the multi 6x-7x-8x-9x, which means you can lower it but you can't raise it. A $60 cooler can mean the difference between 3GHz & 3.6-3.8GHz. If you can keep stock temps at bay you can push it more and still be safe. My first OC took 15 minutes and from stock I went right to 3.6GHz @400x9 @ 1.52volts my temps are under 50c. During hardcore gaming it has never gone past 48c. Good luck.
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
Rob, you are hired. I couldn't even take the the time to read your 500 word posts. If you are looking for a job, your in. If you want help, then consider distilling you're concerns into the most concise post possible. I really can't comment on content because I stopped reading at the beginning.

Edit: Grammar/punctuation, I was a little frustrated.
I'm a long poster, that is just how I am, sorry you don't like it. But if you feel that a happy OC'ing noob looking for a few answers and talking about his first overclock isn't worth your time, or if you feel that 6 or 7 paragraphs is too much for your mind to handle, then by all means please ignore it entirely, you don't have to be a sarcastic jerk about it.

There are a lot of details in my posts because I want to list everything going on in case somebody who feels like reading the post might find that I'm doing something wrong.
So sue me!
I read my longest post here in about 40 seconds. Funny thing is that I've posted much longer posts than that before. Damn, I might get crucified should somebody have to read for more than a minute! A forum is all about reading/writing (typing). So having a problem with somebody doing just that seems odd to me.

Note that some people don't have a big problem with it and are willing to at least reply, whether they read it all or not.
How something like this frustrates you? Damned if I know.
Again, if you don't like how I post, ignore it. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything. This should have been taught to you when you were 5 or 6 years old.
I've been posting in forums for years now, I don't need help. People respond whether they are short or long, its not an issue for me.
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
If you have an E6600 then you can change the multi 6x-7x-8x-9x, which means you can lower it but you can't raise it. A $60 cooler can mean the difference between 3GHz & 3.6-3.8GHz. If you can keep stock temps at bay you can push it more and still be safe. My first OC took 15 minutes and from stock I went right to 3.6GHz @400x9 @ 1.52volts my temps are under 50c. During hardcore gaming it has never gone past 48c. Good luck.

I did decide to add another 6 to the FSB (356 FSB) so I could get just over 3.2ghz. 3204mhz to be exact.
Still default voltages and RAM timings. Everything booted up fine and I'm running some stress tests and benchmarks right now. Temps seem to be about the same, but I'll have to see if this can push max cpu temp above 50c, which was the highest I hit at 3.15ghz. And that was with everything stressed out, all hardware.

Now you are tempting me to go for 400 FSB! But isn't that a bad number, strap or something like that?

With a couple cheap north/south bridge fans to keep my whole mobo cool (even though my northbridge heatsink isn't hot), I just may try to do that. Maybe I can do it without them, but I want to be safe. I think I can, just because going from 2.4ghz to 3.2+ghz has maybe raised my temps by 1 degree, maybe 2. And that is a .8ghz difference. Going another .4ghz should only raise them maybe another degree or two.

I will probably have to change from the default voltages though, like you are with 1.52 volts.
However, don't know why but I'm afraid to mess with the default voltages.

What kind of temp increase did you get just from the voltage change itself (not including the FSB increase)?
I'm thinking that upping the volts to like 1.5 might raise my temps a lot. Even without the N/S bridge fans I want to get, I do have some headroom, but I do want to be on the safe side and not max out near 60c.

Should I be so paranoid to adjust volts? If I do adjust them, does my system become less stable? And like I said, what kind of temp increase might I get from changing the voltage?
If things become even a little less stable by doing that, I just might be happy sticking with the 3204mhz I have now.

One last thing. What bios are you using? I did ask the question before about how my temps (both in windows and in the bios, and in TAT) were 10c or more lower than they are now with the F10 bios.
So if I didn't update my bios, I would be telling you that my max temp under load is 40c right now at the most, maybe a little less.
But with the F12, I'm at 50c under stress.
That is still worrying me because I don't know which one is more accurate, and since both are so much different, I worry that maybe none of my temp readings are what they say they are.

Thanks. :wink:
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
0
Do not go past 1.55 Vcore with air cooling, its a bad idea. Also do you have CPU Vcore set to auto, if so most motherboards including mine over do it with the Vcore setting if set to auto. What I did was set Vcore to 1.45 and just keep raising the FSB until theres instability and just raise the Vcore a little and see it that makes it stable. I know Tom's Hardware has an overclocking guide thats easy to unstand, let my try and find it.
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
I used the Gigabyte DS3 guide. It said that for moderate overclocks to just leave the vcore where it is, unless of course your clock is unstable.
And I did check for fluctuations in vcore using speedfan at idle and while testing and they did not fluctuate. Perhaps one of the settings I disabled was "auto" for vcore, although I don't remember that specifically.
But I do know that vcore is stable at 1.35.

I would try to bump it up, manually, but like I said I'm a little paranoid of messing with the default voltages right now and I have no idea what kind of heat increase it might cause.
If somebody told me that it might add a degree or two, then that might be OK, anything more than that and I will just leave it where it is. I've heard of people lowering vcore to get better temps. That might be something I can try.
What do you think?
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
0
As long as your temps are no more then 65c using TAT (which uses temp sensor in each core versus the one in center=over all temp) with Orthos at full load. I tried going right to 3.6 using auto Vcore setting, then I noted my Vcore and then disabled auto Vcore went to the Vcore where it was at when set to auto. I then began to lower the Vcore until Orthos failed, then upped it and tested again till it didn't fail.

I lowered my Vcore from Auto 1.57v down to 1.52v and that brought my temps down a lot. Don't exceed 1.55 unless you can maintain cool temps. If you had water cooling you could go as high as 1.6v. Remember that Intel designs their Core 2's to last at least ten years at stock voltages, so by overvolting (overclocking) your only shaving off a few years. But who do you know that has had a CPU for more than four years?
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
So is TAT more trustworthy than even the bios? I feel like I can't trust TAT or any other method right now because I mentioned about how, between bios (two different bios) and windows, I've seen idle as low as 19c and as high as 39c!!!
My problem is that TAT seems to do what all other software does, which they all basically read about 4c lower than the bios reads.

It sounds like you aren't even sure, if you OC'ed right away, how much cooler you would be with stock voltage.
If I go from 1.35 to 1.5 vcore, will I see a big temp difference? Because if you saw a temp difference just dropping from 1.57 to 1.52, then I do worry what going from 1.35 to something like 1.5 might do as far as higher temps.

Water cooling is definitely out of the equation. As much as I would love it, that is just going a little too far for my tastes. I'd rather sink that $$ into upgrading hardware. Especially since air cooling is so successful with the C2D's, I don't see the need.
Maybe if the next gen of cpu's are pretty hot, then I might.

What you said about 65c being the max is good to know. I've heard some people say 60c. But I'm assuming that as long as you are under 70c, even if being at 68c takes 5 years off the cpu life, then you "should" still have 5 good years if that 10 year thing is accurate.
Anyhow, despite my concern about temp readings all over the place, not one of them has been anywhere near 65c, which is good.
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
0
First I don't trust my bios for temps only for voltage. The reason I don't trust the bios temp is cuz when you have an Intel motherboard, Intel processer and an Intel chipset, I'll trust Intel's TAT temp program over all. Remember TAT is reading the same DTS (Thermal Temp Sensor) that the bios is reading. My bios is made by some other company. Now if you using the stock cooler then no you should not go past 3.2Ghz if you have good airflow. If you want more you must get a really good CPU HSF (Heat Sink Fan) like the Tuniq Tower 120.

Ok for the 60c temp your hearing is the CPU IHS (integrated heat speader) temp, not core temp. Theres two types of sensors in the CPU, two one inside each core and one inbetween the cores on the processer die. The 60c temp spec is for the die temp sensor inbetween the cores. The core temp spec is for the sensor inside each core 65c cool, 70c warm and 75c hot. We all prefer to stay under 65c core temp, your core temp will aways be 15 degrees hotter than your "CPU temp" (the one inbetween)

So we have the "CPU temp", the sensor inbetween the cores (spec 60c). Then theres the "core temp" one in each core (Spec 65c) Sorry if I am repeting my self I just don't want to confuse anyone. I do agree that water cooling is not for the average consumer as setting one up is no easy task. You have to worry about condisation dripping over your motherboard. Heres the cooler I recommend>> And don't worry its not to heavy or to big for your motherboard.

 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
Good info.
That was another thing I forgot to ask about with the 3 different temps (also confusing).
I've just been looking at the two core temps that TAT shows, not so much the the other temp (in between the cores as you say).

However, I don't have any 15c difference. My cpu temp runs basically the same as the cores, that is why I always thought that cpu temp was an average temp between the two cores, but I guess it isn't. Even now, one of my cores is 32c, and my cpu temp is exactly the same. All 3 readings have always been roughly the same, surely not a 15c difference, and this was true even before I started to OC, and was also true before I did the bios update.
I'm thinking that since I'm stable and having OC success and decent temps that this shouldn't be a problem.
However, should I be concerned?
 

xringx

Distinguished
May 2, 2007
475
0
18,790
1
Just trying to give you a clue. Rock on.
All he is saying, and now me, is that you pack a lot of content into one post. You will find more help from various people if shorten your posts with with concise information. Its something i have had to learn also.

Otherwise.

Trust TAT in conjunction with Speedfan.

I didnt raise any voltages, infact I lowered my vcore to 1.2000. I went from 1.86Ghz to 3.0Ghz with a tat in the mid to high 30's to a load no more than 50c with dual prime95's running for upto 8hrs (my temps swing a lot as the room with computer gets very warm in the evenings, 80degrees plus)

I think I read that you used gigabytes OC guide. There is an excellent guide on here somewhere just for the ga-965P and the c2d.

Manually set your memory times to stock. No need to raise them or any voltages.
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
0
Just trying to give you a clue. Rock on.

Trust TAT in conjunction with Speedfan.

I didnt raise any voltages, infact I lowered my vcore to 1.2000. I went from 1.86Ghz to 3.0Ghz with a tat in the mid to high 30's to a load no more than 50c with dual prime95's running for upto 8hrs (my temps swing a lot as the room with computer gets very warm in the evenings, 80degrees plus)

Thats a great OC there all on 1.2v. It seems that the lower end core 2's OC better and as you go up near the X6800 the OC gete smaller. My E6600 at 1.52 vcore @3.6GHz. Same go's for RAM, 6400 chips will go just as high as 1066 chips even though that 1066 dimms are the same 6400 chip, just OC'ed already.
 

xringx

Distinguished
May 2, 2007
475
0
18,790
1
Thank you. According to someone else, older e6300 (b2 vs L2 steppings?) allowed under volting and better OC'ing in general.

I can go higher, in fact I got to 3.52, but I didnt like the temperatures so I didnt test stabilty. Had to get vcore fairly high.

To get to 7x440, I have to move my vcore to 1.25 and my memory timings to 6-6-6-16 and the dimm up .1v Didnt seem worth it.

What I have now seems to be the sweet spot.
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
Thanks for all the notes, guys. What I'm learning is that how far you can go can really vary.
Even with the same cpu, like the e6600, there are many reports of the older produced cpu's overclocked better than the newer ones (mine is labeled 2005), and when I'm seeing what people are doing with the C2D in general, I'm seeing all sorts of stuff, all on air cooling. When I see somebody has water cooling I disregard their OC's as that is a different league.

Anyhow, after the last few posts, I started thinking why not just see how far I can go with the FSB on default voltage, then see if I can even lower the voltage below default values from there to prevent a temp rise.

I did just that! I'm so far beyond my expectations. I am now at a lucky 3.33ghz! Which is a 370 FSB. But what I'm more impressed about is that I got this OC and then lowered my voltage below default!
I really can't believe I'm getting 370 FSB with undervoltage. And, as might be expected, with the slightly lower volts on the vcore (on the e6600 the default is 1.35 and I'm at 1.31), my temps seem to have perhaps lowered, or if anything they stayed the same.

Did stress it out for about a half hour. Still haven't done a 10 hour torture test yet, nor am I sure that I ever will. Mainly because I never play a game or stress out my hardware for anywhere near that long. I might play a game for 2 hours straight, max. And so I just don't see the point of 10 hours, my computer on idle isn't even on for that many hours in a day normally.

Want to thank everybody for clearing things up, and helping me learn that if I do things right I can have a good, high and stable OC. Even should this not end up being stable I know what to do. And the gigabyte board does do a great job when it gets settings it doesn't like. I tried the 370 FSB on 1.2 vcore. It didn't like that too much, but all that happened was it rebooted, I upped it a bit closer to default, then all was good.

And still no hot northbridge. With this latest OC while my temps were at max, I did the touch test on the northbridge, it is barely warm! I have to do the touch test because I don't have a sensor for the northbridge.

Anyhow, at this point, I think I'm about near my max OC without changing voltage above defaults (I can probably go just a little higher with the FSB obviously if I raise the vcore up to default again). And I do still have headroom with temps if I wanted to do that. Maybe I will work on that down the road.
I do have an 8800gts KO coming, and that might raise all temps even though this is the coolest running 8 series card. If that runs around 50c idle like some report, then I may be able to up some voltages above default and see where that takes me because that is just a few degrees higher than my 7900gt is running.
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
0
I seen my friend at 1.44 vcore reach 3.8GHz with good temps. It seems that you got a "lucky chip" (CPU) that can clock high with low voltage. I really believe you can go much higher than you could imagine! On top of that your undervolting and still stable, I wish I was as lucky as you. Later if you deside to go with a really big cooler like the Tuniq Tower 120 or the Thermalright you could go much higher.

"But one thing no one should ever do is OC and not stress test their CPU for at least 12 hours is not good practice. Down the road you might find that you have a doomed Windows XP and damage to your CPU! CPU errors can happen at anytime within ten minutes, one hour or one instant your games get demanding and you'll never know. :cry: I stressed my CPU using Orthos for three days or 72 hours, now thats stability.
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
Yeah, like I said, when I saw my cpu was dated 2005, I figured this had to of been one of the old, and hopefully higher clocking C2D's.
Also Lucky with the really cool northbridge as well, apparently.

I have decided to stop at 3.33ghz (this time I'm serious!), just start enjoying some games. I don't doubt that I could hit 3.8ghz with a voltage increase, however, you are right, I will want to wait later down the road when I feel I could benefit from another boost and have the money for a top of the line HSF. For now 3.33ghz is plenty, no need to get greedy, my gpu is already surely a bottleneck.

I guess I will run at least a 10 hour stress test, I can try to go 12. You guys know more about this than I do.
Even though I don't understand all the reasons why I need to do it, I will do it if it is an important thing.
It sound sounds so harsh to torture your system for that long, my fear is that the test itself is more likely to damage something than the consequences of not running the test for 12 hours.

But I do have a pretty good OC here, and I sure as hell can't afford for anything to go wrong in the future.
So, again, if you guys say this is the best thing I can do, that it is safe, and can prevent future problems, then I will definitely do it. And I will.
If it can tell me everything is really stable, it is worth it.

Btw, do you still use your computer during that 72 hours or do you have a backup? Luckily I at least have the internet on another computer, just won't be able to game for that 12 hours.
Did you still use the computer during the test? I noticed that I could do some things while under stress, but things loaded VERY slow, as expected.
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
0
Thing is that the stress tests monitor you hardware and if for some reason your CPU is having trouble keeping up with Orthos, it will stop the test and thats when you get an error detected. Think of Orthos as a drill instructor that will push you to the limit but he's not going to let you hurt yourself. It would take a long time to damage your CPU even at 80c for months on end.

But I agree that your OC is pretty good and safe, you know it can handle anything you through at it and still run cool. Better safe than sorry applys here. Enjoy it for now and maybe later when your more knowlegable about OC'ing then you could see maybe more power out of your CPU. Enjoy it and let the fun begin.
 

robx46

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2006
115
0
18,680
0
Yeah, having been an OC noob just days ago, never having a board that could OC, things are moving along so fast.
I almost feel like I'm cheating something. Know what I mean? Like I don't deserve even this good of an OC. And I certainly didn't expect it. It is still blowing my mind that I'm OC'ed almost a full ghz when I was only expecting something under 2.9ghz due to my not having top of the line case and HSF.

As for testing, I'm a little confused about some thing. On the guide I read, it said to download prime95. You mention Orthos. Does it matter which one I use?
And I'm assuming I want to stress everything at once, I guess there are options to stress only the cpu, or just the memory. I suppose it makes sense that I torture everything.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY