Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 OC help

[Funtoss]

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 OC help
(its G0 stepping)

i m at 3.1ghz atm and i want to reach 3.4ghz - 3.6ghz

its winter over here so temps get to as high as 40-50'c on 3.1ghz

here are some pics that i tried with multiplier on 8 but haven't tried with multiplier on 9

please help me

thanks in advance

 

[heky]

A liitle more info would be good. Are you using the board in your specs? So your overclock at 450*8 didnt boot? I am affraid with that board you wont get high fsb on a quad. Try 400*9 and report back.

Also that cheap PSU isnt helping.

 

[Bo$$]

turn spreadspectrum off.
pci express freq at 100
lock ram speed at 677
also use slightly higher mem voltage like 2.1v will compensate
other than that all the settings look good...

 

[meran]

hmm my old q6600 was ok @3.2 stock voltage 3.4@1.4 3.6 wasn't stable at any volts with insane heat...only lucky old chips get that high

 

[Black Panther]

That's my exact same bios screen

Remove the DRAM frequency from Auto, then choose the lowest factor. Your RAM would still be overclocked but that changes the ratio thus enabling you to get a higher cpu overclock.
I did that myself, if I left it on auto my ram would go above 1000 Mhz and not enable me to run the cpu at 4Ghz. Putting DRAM frequency on manual and choosing the lowest one, my RAM runs now at 890Mhz (445 FSB) instead of 800Mhz.

Also, put your PCI clock at 33.33Mhz and your PCI-E frequency at 100Mhz otherwise by increasing the FSB you'd overclock them as well (at possible damage risk).

 

[Bo$$]

That's my exact same bios screen

Remove the DRAM frequency from Auto, then choose the lowest factor. Your RAM would still be overclocked but that changes the ratio thus enabling you to get a higher cpu overclock.
I did that myself, if I left it on auto my ram would go above 1000 Mhz and not enable me to run the cpu at 4Ghz. Putting DRAM frequency on manual and choosing the lowest one, my RAM runs now at 890Mhz (445 FSB) instead of 800Mhz.

Also, put your PCI clock at 33.33Mhz and your PCI-E frequency at 100Mhz otherwise by increasing the FSB you'd overclock them as well (at possible damage risk).

quads are a little more difficult for a board to clock so additional voltage may be needed

 

[Funtoss]

A liitle more info would be good. Are you using the board in your specs? So your overclock at 450*8 didnt boot? I am affraid with that board you wont get high fsb on a quad. Try 400*9 and report back.

Also that cheap PSU isnt helping.

yeah, i m using the board specs and still no luck with 400*9

it booted with (356*9) 3.2ghz but not stable. (tried with intel burn test and crashed)

so far i m on 3.1ghz stable

 

[Bo$$]

well do be honest that board probably wont be able to do it...

 

[Funtoss]

okay thanks for trying to help me everyone, really appreciate it

guess i m stuck with 3.1ghz then :L

gonna upgrade in 6 months or so

thanks again!

 

[Widjaja]

Apparently someone on Trademe got theirs up to 4Ghz. lol

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

try 425 x 8 for 3.4 im running that at the min old c2 quads have holes in the frequency range they just dont like mine dosnt like between 350- 390 but runs fine at 400 - 450 obv with extra volts all round at 425 youll need decent voltage goin to your NB 1.45 for me

 

[Bo$$]

okay thanks for trying to help me everyone, really appreciate it

guess i m stuck with 3.1ghz then :L

gonna upgrade in 6 months or so

thanks again!

keep upping your FSB by 10mhz with a 9x multiplier you fill find the max

 

[Black Panther]

well do be honest that board probably wont be able to do it...

Perhaps off-topic but might help the OP:

I've got the vanilla Asus P5B, which was cheaper (and probably even older) than the OP's. But my board does 445 FSB stable 24/7, so shouldn't his better-than-mine-board also be stable at 445?

 

[heky]

You have a dual-core, he has a quad. It is way more difficult for a board to clock a quad than a dual-core. Especially in the high fsb range.

 

[Black Panther]

You have a dual-core, he has a quad. It is way more difficult for a board to clock a quad than a dual-core. Especially in the high fsb range.

Thanks for the tip. Is that a general rule of thumb i.e. would it relatively be easier to oc an i3 to 4.5Ghz than an i7 to the same speed (32nm)?
Or does it apply only to the older generation of cpu's like my 45nm and the 65nm Q6600?

 

[Bo$$]

Thanks for the tip. Is that a general rule of thumb i.e. would it relatively be easier to oc an i3 to 4.5Ghz than an i7 to the same speed (32nm)?
Or does it apply only to the older generation of cpu's like my 45nm and the 65nm Q6600?

Yes it is 65nm quads are MUCH harder to clock as it strains the NB more than normal, im not sure about current generation but on 775 it is the case

Perhaps off-topic but might help the OP:

I've got the vanilla Asus P5B, which was cheaper (and probably even older) than the OP's. But my board does 445 FSB stable 24/7, so shouldn't his better-than-mine-board also be stable at 445?

Well, each board is different, but i went by general internet trends when i googled the board
also that chipset is not exactly renouned for it's quad clocking capabilities