Q6600 @ 3.8 GHz air cooled

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Read the sticky in the CPU section of the Overclocking forums. It's titled "Core 2 Quad and Duo Temperature Guide", written by CompuTronix. It's a great guide and worth the time to read and follow.
 
How high can the Q6600's temp go and still be safe?

When I OC mine to 3.6Ghz...I break into the 70C+ temps w/small ftts in prime95.
 



Really? Are basing this off your extensive research on VIDs and corresponding overclocks?

While I didn't compile the results myself I did read through about 100 pages on two different forums of people collecting VID + Overclock results for the q6600. 3.8ghz for his VID rating is not out of the question with his current vcore or a touch higher.

On the other hand I don't think he can run 3.9 without really ramming up the voltage on his cpu which while it might work and with heafty cooling might run "just" cool enough, but it will start to die at an accelerated rate from the overvolting.
 
Maybe I should explain a bit better.

VID = Voltage ID = voltage your mobo will assign at stock speeds

Intel lists the VID for the q6600 as .85 - 1.5 with 1.2 - 1.375 being the more common VID distribution with a few sub 1.2 VID making their way out of the intel factory.

The actual impact is dramatic between a VID of 1.2 and 1.3.

A chip with a VID of 1.2 can usually run stable at 3.6ghz@1.3v

Compared to a chip with a VID of 1.3 that only runs at 2.4@1.3v

That .1v difference in VID makes a huge difference in overclockability for both voltage required and in turn heat generation.


I tested this personally on my q6600 VID 1.2375 which runs stable 3.6ghz@1.345.
 
Thanks for the clearification Perp, I have no idea what VID is.

Perhaps you'd like to define what you mean by stable as well. Our definitions may differ and your stable might be a joke to me.
 
LOL, I love it, and yes, I believe the VID also makes a big difference in your OC. Its like being able to use extra voltage notches that the other doesnt have! I have a 1.2625 g0, thats a upper mid VID, I wish I had a 1.2 or lower one as well. I have a high VID b3. Its a flamer at 3.2! Its 1.3125.

The VID is the voltage that it passed intels rigorous testing at. Some pass low for some reason or another, and thats how you get the VID. The highest VID they have released in the q6xxx series is 1.3250 And you DO not want one of those if you can help it! Its random, and no way to know what one you'll get since they all work at rated speeds and such for at least as long as their warranty period!

Thats why the processor is rated at .85 - 1.5. They make real low ones that work for whatever reason at low voltage, but max out at 1.3250 to stay withing the 1.55 volt maximum rating for the q6600. Nice, huh? But Luck has alot to do with the one you'll get! I will be watching for a low vid one myself!

--Lupi!
 


Gaming stable - 1hr OCCT (2-3 times with no errors)

24/7 stable - 12hrs prime95 small ffts (2/4 threads for duo/quad) and another 12hrs large ffts for memory testing


Maybe not the most extreme stability testing, but I don't build servers.


Side note:

I like super-pi for a quick stability test, but I'm running 64bit vista on both of my machines. Super-pi doesn't function properly with these OS due to the aero effects and oddly vista sounds. Don't have the links to the issue, but supposedly disabling 2-3 things in the higher end vistas will keep superpi from crashing. I can assure you though that with both of my OS (64ultimate, 64homepremium) it crashes even at completely stock clocks. Sucks, because I really like the program as a general benchmark.
 
Odd, mine won't run on either machine with stock settings on either of my machines.

I was curious about the issue and a few threads came up where people isloated the problem by disabling **** in vista. They probably aren't even sure what's causing it, but it doesn't seem to be isolated to specific mobo/chip combos. The only common factor identified is vista's with aero effects.
 
It appears to run just fine over here without any mods to anything. Got me. As a matter of fact, it works on both my 64 bit comps.

I agree that its always possible for something you use as a test to have problems like everything else does! Maybe that version needs you to disable driver signature verification?

--Lupi
 
Say Perp, what program are you using to figure out the VID? Coretemp?

If so, I have come across people who's VID displayed in Coretemp changes from mobo to mobo, leading me to believe that what Coretemp displays is rubbish.

It is also entirely possible that just by chance you happen to get a Q6600 that displays low and OCs very well. Just one sample won't prove anything. Furthermore, data on correlation between VID and OCs doesn't imply causation.
 
Thats true! Just waiting to at least prove that it coincidentally works for me when I get another quad of any VID! (And if it works for me, I am mostly happy!)

By reasonable deduction, one must conclude until seen otherwise that it would help with OCing. Simply because its is so low, making it cooler, prone to a longer life, and more than likely you will really notice a longer life at the higher speeds simply because you dont need as much voltage as the automatically higher VID ones would.

But then again, it could just be coincidence. I would hope that the people that have shared their VIDs and temps and such would lie and say its cooler, not hotter, so when they have all turned out hotter and needing more voltage. ::Shrugs!:: But ya never know. I will have another quad within a month. And since I have a g0 and b3, doesnt matter the type to begin my tests, and since I have 5 motherboards, and my VIDs NEVER change... my data should be sound.

::Sticks tongue out at Evil.::

So far its the normal reaper without those huge heat sinks, or balistix which hit 5-5-5-12 @ their rated voltage and 1066. Dunno if they could maintain their 4-4-4-12 at 950, but they look good!

--Lupi!
 
There are known to be a couple of people who've said coretemp is reporting vcore instead of VID but I don't know which hardware is having this issue. Pretty easy to tell if it's reporting vcore though, and the vast majority of people using coretemp are getting correct reading.

VID is a value assigned by intel and it's what the CPU tells the mobo to set the "auto" vcore. The different vcore values at "auto" from mobo to mobo are rounding/voltage values from the mobo itself not the VID. I have never seen anyone say the coretemp reports a different VID on the same chip on 2 different motherboards.

Also, lower VID values are definitely an indication of how far you can overclock a chip because of voltage headroom. There are lots of other factors in overclocking a given system (NB, RAM) not related to the CPU itself which can drastically change how far you are able to push the chip.

There is far more than "one" sample correlating VID value to maximum overclock and the data overwhelmingly suggests that all else being equal lower VID = higher overclocking potential.
 
I agree. I havent seen a single person saying Hey man, you all are a bunch of asses, because my 1.3250 VID processor does, blahblah.

I am inclined to believe that out of all these people, though it really isnt ALOT of people, no one has reported good/excellent OCing with a high VID chip. As a matter of fact, all seem to be very hot and take a huge amount of vcore.

I am right there asking every new guy that needs help for his VID so I can watch how their OCing proceeds. I will pay special attention to high and low VIDs. I wanna see someone with a 1.2000 or lower one OC.

My guess is with that extra voltage you can use, OCing higher is a snap, unless its that unlucky Processor that simply doesnt OC. If a 1.2625 can hit 3.6 @ 1.38 volts loaded and stay very cold, under that 65. I think it was 62c.

I can only imagine if I had access to that some odd 10-12 voltage steps due to the VID being low. I'll bet that a 1.2000 Vid could hit 3.6 at 1.32 volts in windows!! Thats my b3's VID, hehe.

--Lupi
 
Of course I don't disagree with the fact that lower VID brings better OC, but I'd like to see more definite proof, perhaps a test.

While data means a lot of things, it doesn't mean everything. Ex: The bigger the shoe size, the better the reading score. The correlation between these two variable is nearly 1, thus one would be inclined to think that bigger shoe size equates to better reading skills. However, there is a confounding variable, which is age. Obviously as you grow older, your shoe size increases and you grow smarter, thus the very close relationship with shoe sizes and reading skills.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom