My first attempt at CPU overclocking.

[Tommygunn]

I decided to overclock my Intel E6400 (2.13GHz) to achieve a bit more performance for some of the more demanding games that I have.

My first attempt was to run the FSB at 332MHz x 8(fixed) to achieve 2.656GHz and ran this at 1.10V.
I stress tested it with Orthos but after 45seconds it stopped the test.

I presume this is because of a lack of Voltage?

I then altered the Voltage to 1.15V and I ran Orthos for an 1hr 45mins, until I got bored. There were no problems.
During the test neither of the CPU cores went over 31°C and mostly fluctuated around 28-30°C.

I think I'll push it a bit further.

Are there any advantages to keeping the Voltage as low as possible or as long as it is in the threshold it makes no difference either way?

Tom.

 

[Jetster]

Are there any advantages to keeping the Voltage as low as possible or as long as it is in the threshold it makes no difference either way?

Tom.

Yes you dont burn the chip up. Im no expert at overclocking but you mess with the voltages last. 31C is nothing. Was that temp under load? ....Your not even close to its peak temp. Its going to be your memory that limits you. Up the FSB first. Lower the memory speed and see how far you can go. Then lower your FSB and raise your memory speed and see where it can go. Then work them both to just under there limit. The you can add some volts to get it a little more.

Again Im no expert. And I dont know what that chip is capable of

Also I dont know what Orthos is. I use prime95 and speen fan + CPUID

 

[Tommygunn]

What I was trying to say was within the 'theshold' of it not working and burning up is there any disadvantage or advantage to going with the lower end or upper end of Voltage limits?

Tom.

 

[johnspack]

This link should give you an example. You are at way too low vcore to start ocing:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cheap-thrills,1335-3.html
The intel limit officially is 1.36v, but it's possible to use more and still be safe.

 

[Jetster]

What I was trying to say was within the 'theshold' of it not working and burning up is there any disadvantage or advantage to going with the lower end or upper end of Voltage limits?

Tom.

Just that less volts = lower temps

 

[Tommygunn]

Fair enough.

Tom.

 

[LifeOnMars]

I think you should do exactly what you are doing, little by little. That's a nice initial overclock you have already at low volts.

May I reccomend Intel Burn Test, do 20 runs with high/very high stress level and make sure you choose 2 threads. This will heat up your CPU to the max and be a great/quick stress test. But again, I stress, little by little. This will eliminate any problems/confusion later on and will probably grant you a better overclock at lower volts/temps.

Also use Prime 95 as well if you can, it's much better at picking up potential memory errors whilst overclocking.

Have fun and I'm sure that 6850 of yours will benefit greatly from having a bit more horsepower feeding it

 

[Tommygunn]

I decided to up the stakes and put the CPU up to 3GHz (375 x 8) with a Voltage of 1.23125V and I ran Orthos for 2hrs with core temps no higher than 36°C and everything stayed stable.
So that seems good.

Jetster,
Orthos is a stress tester of which I'm not certain as to the pros and cons when comparing it to Prime95.
RAM is next on the cards.

Johnspack,
Thanks for the link, I will have a peruse.
Bare with me, as this is my first time, but are you saying that I am not properly overclocking since I am below 1.36V, i.e.1.23125V?

LifeOnMars,
I have just downloaded Intel Burn Test so I'll give it a shot later. I also have Prime somewhere.

A few questions. Why has my RAM speed incrementally increased when I have raised the FSB speed. When everything was stock it was 800MHz, now, with the FSB at 375, the RAM speed is 940MHz.
Is that good or bad, normal or abnormal?

I am also limited to one 2Gb stick of memory at the the moment, see link below, due to an MB problem. Will this have any impact one way or the other when it comes to OCing?
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155340


Tom.

 

[JustaTinkerer]

I decided to up the stakes and put the CPU up to 3GHz (375 x 8) with a Voltage of 1.23125V and I ran Orthos for 2hrs with core temps no higher than 36°C and everything stayed stable.
So that seems good.

Jetster,
Orthos is a stress tester of which I'm not certain as to the pros and cons when comparing it to Prime95.
RAM is next on the cards.

Johnspack,
Thanks for the link, I will have a peruse.
Bare with me, as this is my first time, but are you saying that I am not properly overclocking since I am below 1.36V, i.e.1.23125V?

LifeOnMars,
I have just downloaded Intel Burn Test so I'll give it a shot later. I also have Prime somewhere.

A few questions. Why has my RAM speed incrementally increased when I have raised the FSB speed. When everything was stock it was 800MHz, now, with the FSB at 375, the RAM speed is 940MHz.
Is that good or bad, normal or abnormal?

I am also limited to one 2Gb stick of memory at the the moment, see link below, due to an MB problem. Will this have any impact one way or the other when it comes to OCing?
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155340


Tom.

Right, 1st nice OC should really feel/see a difference in gaming now the bottleneck of that processor is open, especially with your card.

That P5Q has got some FSB for duals should be able to see out 3.5 if you push it a bit.

Right on to answers, what is your in BIOS vcore set @ vs your CPUZ core voltage.

You might have a low VID CPU, hypothetically meaning lower temps and higher overclocking potential.

With good cooling I wouldnt sweat setting the BIOS vcore @ 1.4.

Your RAM increasing speed is normal, just means its linked to your FSB, overclocking RAM is what your doing, using a divider you can get it below stock or close to stock if what you want to do is push the CPU. Depending on your RAM 140Mhz overclock could be close to max on its stock volts.

For all now that all being said its sitting nice for that overclock.

If you wanted to push the CPU then RAM could be an issue unless you change dividers.

Oh and 1 stick of RAM is better for overclocking so Im led to believe, I have never pushed hard enough to notice instability with 2 sticks vs 1

 

[Black Panther]

Check out your ram.

Is it overclocking itself together with your cpu?

I can only speak from my own experience - with my bios if I were not to touch the RAM's speed in the bios, to get my cpu to 4Ghz my RAM would end up at over 1066Mhz (instead of 800Mhz) and the OC would fail.

So I reduced my RAM speed to 667Mhz. Then when I oc'd the cpu to 4Ghz the RAM speed only went up to 890Mhz (dual channel - each one is at 445Mhz) i.e. still overclocked but it enabled me to reach a higher cpu overclock.

 

[Dice]

what are you using to monitor temps?

 

[Tommygunn]

I've just conducted a couple of tests with the Intel Burn Test.
First test failed @ 1.23125V. I then bumped it up two notches to 1.24375 and it passed.

However, as LifeOnMars suggested, I ran the test 20 times with 2 threads but I was only able to conduct the test at 'Standard' i.e. 1024Mb. Is this correct since I have one 2Gb stick inserted?

JustaTinkerer,
Last good VCore is at 1.24375V. CPUZ is showing 1.224V.

Black Panther,
I have not touched any of the settings for the RAM, everything is set to Auto at present. Therefore I presume the answer to you question is, the RAM is OCing itself in tandem with the CPU.

Thing is my BIOS warns me that if I drop below 800 or 790, or whatever it is (can't remember), then the system will become unstable, explode etc. In anycase the option to go lower that 790(?) (again I can't recall the exact figure) does not exist, certainly no lower than 750, so that option might not be open to me.

Dice,
I'm using Speedfan and also the packaged ASUS PC Probe II software.

Tom.

 

[Black Panther]

Black Panther,
I have not touched any of the settings for the RAM, everything is set to Auto at present. Therefore I presume the answer to you question is, the RAM is OCing itself in tandem with the CPU.

Go to bios and reduce the clocks of the RAM. i.e. if they're 400Mhz make them at 333Mhz.

I've got a similar mobo myself (I have an Asus P5B) and my ram was also originally 400Mhz (800Mhz dual channel).

By putting my ram at 333Mhz (667 dual channel) it increased in tandem with my cpu overclock and now it's at 445Mhz (890Mhz dual channel) and stable.

Don't worry, underclocking your ram won't harm anything.

 

[Jetster]

The FSB will change your CPU and Memory MHz together. They both have different capability as far as overclocking. Your CPU will overcolck further. But you want to see what both will do individually. ie lower the FSB on your CPU and push your ram just to see how far your memory will go. Then test the CPU up the FSB but lower the memory way down. Then you know what both will do so adjust accordingly so they are both at the peak.

They is somthing wrong with the way your reading your temps. That cant be right. CPU cores should be around 60C under load. Use speed fan when you run Prime95

 

[Arctucas]

Try using RealTemp.

 

[Tommygunn]

There seems to be an approx 10°C discrepancy between Speedfan/ASUS PC Probe and Real Temp.
I had been running Intel Burn Test for about 3 or 4 mins and these were the results:

Tom.

 

[Arctucas]

I have found Speedfan to not be the most accurate.

For a second opinion, try HWMonitor.

But, getting 52° on stock cooling at 100% load is still very good. What is your ambient room temperature?

 

[Tommygunn]

Room temp is about 21.5°C.

 

[Tommygunn]

HW Monitor seems to sit squarely in the middle with Speedfan at the bottom end of 10°C and Real Temp at the top end, with a +/- of about 3 or 4°C on all measurements.

 

[Arctucas]

Honestly, I would not worry too much.

I would concentrate more on making sure it is stable.