Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Disappointed on Intel

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 5, 2006 12:57:04 AM

Recently I have purchased a classic Intel motherboard (DG965RY) with Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 CPU. I’m working on a very CPU intensive task, which runs about 3 days continuously. I was very surprised when the loaded processor dropped 35% of its clock speed. CPU-Z and Intel Thermal Analysis Tool showed only 1.560GHz (sometimes 970 MHz) instead of 2.4GHz. (The CPU reached the 2.4GHz then only the OS was working.) Using Tom’s Hardware’s Relative Performance Index (http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/11/04/processor-per...) this speed around the speed of AMD Athlon X2 64 3800+.

I need help to decide what to do. I see 3 solutions:
1. Buy an Asus P5B Deluxe motherboard. It may not bring down the speed of E6600.
2. Buy better CPU cooler. (I have the original CPU fan, but have 5 case fans.)
3. Buy an AMD Athlon X2 64 5000+ CPU. It may not lose CPU speed.

I have tested the CPU speed using CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php) and Thermal Analysis Tool (http://shintai.ambition.cz/files/tat.exe).
I have loaded the CPU with running the following simple C# code in two DOS windows (for two cores):
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Text;
namespace ConsoleApplication1 {
class Program {
static long testsize = 10000;
static double[] AB = new double[testsize*100];
static double[] AS = new double[testsize];
static void Main(string[] args) {
double Dtmp = 0.0, Dsum = 0.0;
DateTime Start, Stop;
Random rand = new Random();
for (long i = 0; i < testsize; i++) {
Dtmp = rand.NextDouble();
if (Dtmp < 0.5) Dtmp += 0.5;
AS = Dtmp;
}
for (long i = 0; i < testsize*100; i++) {
Dtmp = rand.NextDouble();
if (rand.NextDouble() < 0.5) Dtmp *= -1;
AB = Dtmp;
}
Start = DateTime.Now;
for (long j = 0; j < testsize; j++) {
Dtmp = 0.0;
for (long i = 0; i < testsize * 100; i++) {
Dtmp += (AS[j] * AB + AS[testsize - 1 - j]);
}
Dsum += Dtmp / (testsize * 100.0);
}
Stop = DateTime.Now;
Dtmp = (double)(Stop.Ticks - Start.Ticks) / 10000000.0;
Console.WriteLine(Dtmp + " " + Dsum);
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
}

More about : disappointed intel

November 5, 2006 1:14:32 AM

Disable that speedStep or whatever the hell that crap is in Bios that throtles down your CPU. How is your CPU temp? maybe the heatsink is not dead on so it overheats? and speed is going down?
November 5, 2006 1:19:15 AM

Sounds like speedstep, or C1E feature?

The AM2 5000+ would have the simliar feature, cool-n-quiet.

So, you would need to put a load on the CPU to get it at its stock max speed, or disable the feature.
Related resources
November 5, 2006 1:20:47 AM

woah hold on, slow down. ok before your start buying parts (and possibly wasting money). stop and think, first i need to know a couple things, what are your temps, what is your system build (IE ram, motherboard hdd and such). this will help a bit.

alright, now the first things that come to mind about what could be causing this are

* your processor is overheating and is throttling itself to prevent burning to a crisp, as such post your temps for idle (just the desktop) and on load (running your program, a game or other programs like PC mark, but try to get 100% CPU utilization)

* your system build is very unbalanced, IE something in your system is running much slower and is holding other parts back- not enough ram, slow hard drive or such.

* your system has determined that your program doesn't need that much power and is throttling itself automatically. this can be disabled in the BIOS. both AMD and intel systems do this.

thats it, again post your temps and system build, and don't go buying parts yet, this is probably just an overseen problem.
November 5, 2006 1:34:37 AM

dont forget, make sure you check to remove the plastic slip on the bottom of some heatsinks
November 5, 2006 1:47:41 AM

Unfortunately this Intel motherboard BIOS doesn't allow to change the speedstep. I had no problem changing speedstep on my older Asus motherboard.
November 5, 2006 1:48:41 AM

I did.
November 5, 2006 1:48:43 AM

Set Windows [Power Settings] to "Always On"
November 5, 2006 2:33:41 AM

My system is balanced. I spent a week to build it. I tried to get the best for less. I have loaded it on purpose, but expected a better performance. My processor is not able to run on 2.4GHz even for a minute if it is loaded.
November 5, 2006 2:35:22 AM

Quote:
My system is balanced. I spent a week to build it. I tried to get the best for less. I have loaded it on purpose, but expected a better performance. This processor is not able to run on 2.4GHz even for a minute if it is loaded.


Could you please give us your core temps, preferably using TAT, both at idle and load
November 5, 2006 2:47:31 AM

Quote:
Unfortunately this Intel motherboard BIOS doesn't allow to change the speedstep. I had no problem changing speedstep on my older Asus motherboard.


You need to disable EIST. It is located with the power management.
November 5, 2006 3:06:54 AM

Check the following:

Software, Bios, and drivers checklist
Did you run your Windows updates, i.e. did you get SP2 loaded?
Did you load your 965 chipset drivers?
Did you flash the motherboard to the latest bios?
Did you load Intel Management Engine Interface?


Heatsink installation:
Are you using the stock heatsink?
Did you leave the thermal pad on the bottom of the heat sink?
Did you add thermal compound yourself? If so how much?
Are the four grommets that secure the heatsink to the motherboard tightly fastened? - They should be on so tight you could pick the motherboard up by grabbing the heat sink (don't do that :wink: ).

We really need to know your processor temps after you update your bios (the early 965 bios were giving bad temperature readings), otherwise we cannot diagnose your problem between heatsink installation, or software, drivers, and settings.

Core 2 Duo doesn't use Speedstep as the previous forum member noted. The setting in the bios is now EIST (enabled or disabled). It can be turned off and on; however, I don't think you will need to shut if off if you have done the aformentioned items. All those items above will have interplay with your Core 2 Duo's power management and throttling.

I just built a Core 2 Duo with an E6300, and a genuine Intel motherboard almost identical to yours(Intel BOXDG965WHMKR). Mine is the media series i.e. a few more bells and whistles, but it has the 965 chipset just like yours. I haven't had any of these issues. If I can further clarify anything let me know. My system is great and I am very happy with my Intel motherboard - and I would like to help you be happy with yours.

My processor runs at 38 Celius or 100 F. In the bois under hardware monitor you can see what your temps are. Early 965 bios were immature and riddled with issues, its imparative you update your bois.
November 5, 2006 3:38:06 AM

Quote:
Core 2 Duo doesn't use Speedstep any longer as the previous forum member noted. The setting in the bios is now EIST (enabled or disabled).


EIST Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology :wink:
November 5, 2006 3:46:38 AM

Noted. I wasn't sure what the new acronym stood for, but now I do! :wink:
November 5, 2006 3:48:56 AM

This is the TAT log. First part is in half loaded state the second part is 5 minutes after switch on.

Time:, MHz(Processor 0), MHz(Processor 1), DTS(Processor 0), DTS(Processor 1),
22:01:45, 1600, 1566, -42, 82,
22:01:47, 1566, 1566, 85, 82,
22:01:49, 1566, 1566, -42, 82,
22:01:51, 1566, 1566, -42, 82,
22:01:53, 1566, 1566, 85, 82,
22:01:55, 1773, 1566, 85, 82,
22:01:57, 1567, 1566, -42, 82,
22:01:59, 1566, 1687, -42, 82,
22:02:01, 1566, 1566, -42, 83,
22:02:03, 1600, 1600, -42, 82,
22:02:05, 1722, 1566, -42, 82,
22:02:07, 1566, 1566, -42, 83,
22:02:09, 1566, 1566, 85, 83,
22:02:12, 1550, 1566, 85, 82,
22:02:14, 1550, 1566, -42, 83,
22:02:16, 1566, 1567, -42, 82,
22:02:18, 1566, 1573, 85, 82,
22:02:20, 1600, 1566, 85, 82,
22:02:22, 1650, 1566, -42, 83,
22:02:24, 1566, 1566, -42, 82,
22:02:26, 1566, 1567, -42, 82,
22:02:28, 1566, 1566, -42, 83,
22:02:30, 1584, 1566, -42, 82,
22:02:32, 1566, 1566, -42, 83,
22:02:34, 1566, 1566, -42, 83,
22:02:36, 1566, 1566, -42, 83,
22:02:38, 1720, 1577, 85, 83,
Time:, MHz(Processor 0), MHz(Processor 1), DTS(Processor 0), DTS(Processor 1),
22:37:00, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:02, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:04, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:06, 2400, 2400, 59, 60,
22:37:08, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:10, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:12, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:14, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:16, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:18, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:20, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:22, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:24, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:26, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:28, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:30, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:32, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:34, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:36, 2400, 2400, 60, 59,
22:37:38, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:40, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:42, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:44, 2400, 2400, 60, 60,
22:37:46, 2400, 2400, 62, 60,
22:37:48, 2400, 2400, 60, 62,
November 5, 2006 3:54:54 AM

If I am reading this thing right, when your temps are in the 60s your processor flys(2400mhz), when you get into the 80s its throttling so that it doesn't burn up.

Also, you said the second half is 5 min after power at which point your temps finally seem to be in control. What did you change?

Finally, that first batch with negative (-42) and a positive 80 doesn't make any sense. The second batch is logical. There is 30 minute time difference between the first and second batch. I think you have the problem solved.

Please post the resolution for other people that may have the same issue so that they may learn.
November 5, 2006 3:56:16 AM

Whoa, you have a heat problem. Big time. This is why your CPU is throttling. Either you have a serious airflow disruption around your CPU HSF, or the HSF itself is not seated properly.

This is not an uncommon problem. Even very experienced system builders have been having problems with some of the mounting methods used for socket 775 HSFs, particularly the stock HSF, which when seated properly should provide you with idles in the 40s and loaded runs in the 60s..C' of course. This is on TAT.

At a minumim, you should reseat your HSF
November 5, 2006 4:15:02 AM

The result was better for the first 10 minutes. After that almost the same:

Time:, MHz(Processor 0), MHz(Processor 1), DTS(Processor 0), DTS(Processor 1),
23:06:44, 1769, 1566, -42, 83,
23:06:46, 1700, 1725, -42, 82,
23:06:48, 1700, 1800, 85, 82,
23:06:50, 1566, 1566, -42, 82,
23:06:52, 1873, 1567, -42, 82,
23:06:54, 1829, 1686, 85, 81,
23:06:56, 1566, 1686, -42, 81,
23:06:58, 1600, 1830, 85, 82,
23:07:00, 1566, 1641, 85, 82,
23:07:02, 1750, 1750, -42, 82,
23:07:04, 1686, 1566, -42, 83,
23:07:06, 1566, 1600, 85, 82,
23:07:08, 1788, 1734, -42, 82,
23:07:10, 1631, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:12, 1829, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:14, 1566, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:16, 1641, 1730, 85, 82,
23:07:18, 1850, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:20, 1841, 1781, 85, 82,
23:07:23, 1566, 1872, 85, 82,
23:07:25, 2000, 1839, 85, 82,
23:07:27, 1719, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:29, 1567, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:31, 1566, 1900, -42, 82,
23:07:33, 1566, 1661, 85, 82,
November 5, 2006 4:19:36 AM

The computer was switched off.
November 5, 2006 4:23:49 AM

Quote:
The result was better for the first 10 minutes. After that almost the same:

Time:, MHz(Processor 0), MHz(Processor 1), DTS(Processor 0), DTS(Processor 1),
23:06:44, 1769, 1566, -42, 83,
23:06:46, 1700, 1725, -42, 82,
23:06:48, 1700, 1800, 85, 82,
23:06:50, 1566, 1566, -42, 82,
23:06:52, 1873, 1567, -42, 82,
23:06:54, 1829, 1686, 85, 81,
23:06:56, 1566, 1686, -42, 81,
23:06:58, 1600, 1830, 85, 82,
23:07:00, 1566, 1641, 85, 82,
23:07:02, 1750, 1750, -42, 82,
23:07:04, 1686, 1566, -42, 83,
23:07:06, 1566, 1600, 85, 82,
23:07:08, 1788, 1734, -42, 82,
23:07:10, 1631, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:12, 1829, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:14, 1566, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:16, 1641, 1730, 85, 82,
23:07:18, 1850, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:20, 1841, 1781, 85, 82,
23:07:23, 1566, 1872, 85, 82,
23:07:25, 2000, 1839, 85, 82,
23:07:27, 1719, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:29, 1567, 1566, 85, 82,
23:07:31, 1566, 1900, -42, 82,
23:07:33, 1566, 1661, 85, 82,



WAY WAY too high.
Its moot, but did you take these readings with the case open or closed. Either way, your temps are just too high. Your HSF is not seated properly
November 5, 2006 4:24:46 AM

Thats unfortunate! Please keep us informed with your troublshooting and progress so we can help you along.

Good Luck :!:
November 5, 2006 4:26:38 AM

Hehe, I suggest you be "impressed" with Intel for this cooling malfunction not resulting in a fried chip :-D

That said, your cooling solution is not operating correctly, and disabling EIST isn't helping.
November 5, 2006 4:29:44 AM

Gawd.. don't tell me its another socket 775 installation boo boo.

Thank goodness for throttling. :D 
November 5, 2006 4:37:58 AM

I have Windows XP 64 installed on the computer with the latest updates. I have also installed the chipset drivers, the latest BIOS and the latest drivers (LAN, Audio, Video) which was downloaded from the Intel wesite.

I installed the heatsink based on the documentation and it wasn't the first installation. I didn't add any extra thermal compound.
November 5, 2006 4:49:24 AM

The fact that it wasn't the first installation of the heat sink concerns me. The stock heatsink has a thermal pad that should only be used once. This pad is applied at the factory in the right amounts and upon the first boot the processor "melts" it to form a seal between the processor and heat sink. If the integrity of this seal is compromised heat will not be efficiently transferred away. Essentially, I suspect there is some air between your processor and heatsink and air is terrible at conducting heat. I strongly suggest you:
1)Clean off the processor and heatsink of any of the remaining thermal pad.
2)Make a trip to your local retailer and buy some Artic Silver
3)Apply a BB sized amount of Artic Silver to both the heat sink and processor and smear it with a plastic bag over your finger to cover the entire surface area of each. This, along with properly securing the heat sink will ensure that you have a good seal.


If anyone else has some good pointers for cleaning this junk off speak up.
November 5, 2006 5:09:51 AM

-42? How fast would your fan run, if it thought your chip was @ -42?
Either he has a bios that is improperly interpreting the signal from the sensor (most likely) or the on die sensor is hooped.
He should shut off fan speed control, until his problem is fixed. Then he should flash his bios to the latest ver. If that does noy fix the problem, I'm guessing that the on die sensor is bad, and he should rma the chip.
I dont care how badly he installed the hsf, it wont drop the temp of one core to -42.
November 5, 2006 5:15:08 AM

More likely a DTS bug...
temperature = Tcasemax - Intel DTS reading

85 - 127 = -42.
November 5, 2006 5:52:16 AM

It is the first installation on this computer. I meant I have already installed processor before. But I may have to check it.
November 5, 2006 6:27:39 AM

Your PC is crap!
Do you want to trade it with my amasing Athlon64 3200+, Asus A8N5X and 2x512MB A-Data DDR-500?
November 5, 2006 6:36:55 AM

Your PC needs more cowbell.
November 5, 2006 6:37:00 AM

Hm...I have the exact same motherboard with an E6400 in it. So the mechanical part should be identical.

I'm thinking CPU installation problems. I had a really hard time installing the Core 2 Duo in that mobo. You might want to check that the stock cooler is properly inserted and that the 4 "bolts" are all the way through the motherboard. I had to really push it. I could even feel the mobo bend and I was really afraid I was going to break it.

The PC worked ok though and it has been doing so for the last month. Intel TAT shows around 37-41 with "light" operation (Internet, Media Player, Download, Word). With 100% Workload on both cores it did take it to 59-60 in a few minutes and I'm still trying to find a "maximum temp" for the Core 2 Duo. It does seem a little high but I guess you can't really use both cores to 100% today. Intel Desktop Utilities shows slight lower values. The problem is I think with SpeedStep or however its called. The CPU fan won't go above 1100, whether it's at 37C or at 55C.
November 5, 2006 7:32:12 AM

Quote:
I have Windows XP 64 installed on the computer with the latest updates. I have also installed the chipset drivers, the latest BIOS and the latest drivers (LAN, Audio, Video) which was downloaded from the Intel wesite.

I installed the heatsink based on the documentation and it wasn't the first installation. I didn't add any extra thermal compound.


Doesnt matter. The stock HSF has been giving everybody fits, first timers and old timers alike. If you feel it went on reasonably easy, then it didnt go on right.

An after market screw on style HSF can solve that problem for you.
As evilroot said, you should be impressed that the CPUs thermal protection did its job and prevented your CPU from frying.

Good luck
November 5, 2006 7:38:53 AM

Yup, nobody pushes the pins on the stock HSF hard enough.

That HSF is NOT correctly installed. Doesnt matter if you think you did it right, you didnt.

I used one of my stock HSFs the other day for the first time to put my old D805 in amother computer, and was amazed how much pressure the pins needed.
November 5, 2006 11:48:26 AM

Quote:


The PC worked ok though and it has been doing so for the last month. Intel TAT shows around 37-41 with "light" operation (Internet, Media Player, Download, Word). With 100% Workload on both cores it did take it to 59-60 in a few minutes and I'm still trying to find a "maximum temp" for the Core 2 Duo.

85C is the point where the C2D only begins to throttle. The 100% Workload test also produces (by far) the most heat out of any available software. Most realworld software is equivalent to around 65% of the workload test in terms of heat.
November 5, 2006 12:47:31 PM

Windows calculator FTW. Open an instance for each core and have it try figure out a large factorial (999999999999999!).
Guaranteed to get those babies firing on all cilinders in no time. :D 
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
November 5, 2006 2:53:10 PM

You need to reseat your HSF. I had a similar problem when I first installed the Scythe Ninja HSF on my C2D CPU.

Buy a tube of Artic Silver 5 (or whichever thermal compound you prefer). Pour some rubbing alcohol on to a lint free cloth towel and remove the thermal compound from both CPU and heatsink.

Put a small dab of AS5 on the CPU (size of a rice grain) and uses a credit card or something to spread it evenly. Then attach the HSF.
November 5, 2006 4:30:08 PM

Thank you for all good advices. The problem solved. I have changed the cooling on the CPU. Now the CPU performance results are close to the expected.
November 5, 2006 4:46:20 PM

Quote:
The problem solved. I have changed the cooling on the CPU. Now the CPU performance results are close to the expected.

After all the back and forth in this thread it would be nice if you could provide a little more info beyond "problem solved".

What did you change that fixed things? :? :?: :?:

-john
November 5, 2006 9:43:36 PM

Did you change the thermal compound or get a new heatsink?
November 5, 2006 10:15:06 PM

I don't like assuming.. :lol: 

But I'm assuming again, that it seems Intel stock 775 socket HFS setups are just cheap trash or poor design. Just seen too many posts about redoing the HSF setup around 10 times till the temps were down to where they should be.

So, I'm saying its more due to the actual 4 pins, rather then thermal compound.
November 6, 2006 2:44:14 AM

:lol: 

Thats the same video... but but but... its not english when I started watching.

:? . o O (not even sure what language it is, sounds spanish or french? I dunno :cry: )

:oops:  <-- speaks english, or really bad englwish.

Edit: doh didn't take notice of the text on at the beginning. :lol: 
November 6, 2006 7:33:13 AM

I was curious so I tried to track down the english version of the video. I believe it's here.

FWIW, I think Simonetti posted a link to the Português version.

-john
November 7, 2006 5:56:11 PM

Details:

I have decided to go with my second option and bought a Zalman heatsink. Used Artic Silver 5 thermal compound (thanks for the link WR2) and used my credit card to spread it evenly (thanks for the tip jaguarskx).
The CPU temperature is around 55 in unloaded state (I think it is still a little bit high) and around 70 in one thread loaded state. It never reached the 74 Celsius. Now the clock speed is constant 2.4 GHz (EIST disabled in the BIOS) and the performance is amazing. I have to regret my subject.
a c 79 à CPUs
November 7, 2006 7:44:18 PM

Glad to hear you have it 'solved' but those temps still seem high to me, I idle at 33-34 and load at 47-48 on stock HSF. with eist enabled.
November 7, 2006 9:24:26 PM

Quote:
Details:

I have decided to go with my second option and bought a Zalman heatsink. Used Artic Silver 5 thermal compound (thanks for the link WR2) and used my credit card to spread it evenly (thanks for the tip jaguarskx).
The CPU temperature is around 55 in unloaded state (I think it is still a little bit high) and around 70 in one thread loaded state. It never reached the 74 Celsius. Now the clock speed is constant 2.4 GHz (EIST disabled in the BIOS) and the performance is amazing. I have to regret my subject.


I haven't felt any heat my my system at all even under heavy load. The E6600 is amazing. I have stock hsf and the temp is between 37-41C. I threw away my prescott. didn't want to pass that piece of crap on to anyone. Smashed it with a hammer.
November 23, 2006 1:14:52 AM

Quote:
I don't like assuming.. :lol: 

But I'm assuming again, that it seems Intel stock 775 socket HFS setups are just cheap trash or poor design. Just seen too many posts about redoing the HSF setup around 10 times till the temps were down to where they should be.

So, I'm saying its more due to the actual 4 pins, rather then thermal compound.


I just recently built a system with an Intel dg965wh board with a coreduo 1.83mz cpu. I used the stock HSF,even though I read all the horror stories about overheating.

The case did not come with enough standoffs,but I installed the mobo anyway,thinking a few missing didnt matter. I installed the cpu/hsf on the board and was awaiting a better power supply. Upon further consideration,I decided to drive the 50 miles for the 4 more standoffs that I was short. I took off the motherboard,installed the standoffs and checked out the back of the mobo where the 4 corner HSF pegs snap in and stick thru. I pressed each corner peg,holding the other side flat against my other hand and ALL FOUR PEGS needed much more pressure to hear a barely audible tink. Thru the middle of each peg is a black insert that expands the peg end bigger than thet hole. That black,pointed insert must be real close to flush with the peg. Mine were not,even tho,when the board was installed,I pushed as hard as I dared. I also head a "click" from each one,like described in the installation literature. I strongly suggest to anyone using the stock HSF to take the board off and install it,paying particular attention to the black expando inserts in each one.

The stock HSF was suprisingly quiet and vibration free. Combined with a Coolmax silent fan 400W ps,it was quieter than any of the machines I own.

I am hoping this will help someone with their overheating woes :wink:
November 23, 2006 2:02:54 AM

Crud, 55 idle with a Zalman?

I'm playing with overclocking my E6400 (with a Zalman 9700), currently testing 2.93 GHz with dual prime95, and the 100% load temp is less than your idle (52-54C), and the fan's not even close to 100% speed.

Not like the first computer I built. Pentium 630 (yeah, mistake) and stock HSF - with the horrible square of crap on the bottom. Put it all together, power on, 5 seconds - power off. bought acetone and AS5, cleaned her off real good, applied as directed, and it ran much cooler - cooler than your E6600 and Zalman.

Your machine may at least be running ok, but I think you still have a problem.
a c 79 à CPUs
November 24, 2006 2:08:39 PM

Quote:
Crud, 55 idle with a Zalman?

I'm playing with overclocking my E6400 (with a Zalman 9700), currently testing 2.93 GHz with dual prime95, and the 100% load temp is less than your idle (52-54C), and the fan's not even close to 100% speed.

Not like the first computer I built. Pentium 630 (yeah, mistake) and stock HSF - with the horrible square of crap on the bottom. Put it all together, power on, 5 seconds - power off. bought acetone and AS5, cleaned her off real good, applied as directed, and it ran much cooler - cooler than your E6600 and Zalman.

Your machine may at least be running ok, but I think you still have a problem.


Have forgotten what has happened on this, was that to me?
!