Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gigabyte 965P-S3, E6400 - Want to OC but complete newbie

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
December 20, 2006 11:41:32 PM

Howdy folks,

I've been around computers a long assed time and am even a sys admin so work with systems all the time.

I'm totally new to OC'ing though and to be honest dont know that much about all the settings in the BIOS.

I read the 'Core2Duo Overclocking Guide v1.1' but some of the BIOS options dont match options I see in my BIOS (or they could and they're just worded differently and because I dont know what it is I'm looking at I dont realise they're the same thing).


My system is:

E6400 OEM (2Mb Cache version)
Gigabyte 965P-S3
GEIL 2048MB DDR2-800 PC6400 800MHz CAS 5-5-5-12, Aluminum Heat-spreader
Thermaltake Big Typhoon 120 VX


Just wondering if anyone out there with a Gigabyte board could give me idiot proof instructions for my system.
I really dont want to damage it as it's brand new and cost me quite a bit.

Thanks for the help, very appreciated!
Related resources
December 21, 2006 2:16:19 AM

Yes...use ALL the settings. They are safe and will give you a modest start. Also...hit "control F1" when in the bios...this will allow you to get out of automatic mode and make the changes required.
January 4, 2007 7:46:10 AM

Hiya,
Took me a while but I got around to this and did it today (wanted to give my system time to make sure it was stable first with default proper values).

Anyway, set it to these values and when I save to CMOS it just turns off instead of rebooting.

If I then power it on, it starts to boot, gets past displaying the drives then reboots. When it comes back up it has reset the values to default.

I'm guessing its detecting a crash with them so 'saving me' by putting the CPU speeds back to normal.

I presume all the CPU tweaking is done in the MIT screen?


And would I also be correct in thinking that the things that are deciding the OC speed of the system is the CPU clock ratio and the Host Frequency?

476 seems like a big jump from 266.67?

I'd love any instructions on how I can slowly OC this sytem bit by bit to find out what works.


My BIOS options screen for the MIT page looks like this:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n129/Chanur64/IMG_18...
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n129/Chanur64/IMG_18...

(those are his screen shots so the values I just tried that caused it to not boot)
January 4, 2007 9:28:16 PM

I think you need to raise some voltages. Your Vcore might be too low. Many people have reported reboots sometimes revert bios back to default values. It also happened to me. I think the consensus is that raising voltage on Vcore and/or ram is required. Here is what my Bios looks like: I had to "sneak up" on these values...trial and error while watching temperatures.


http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f256/deadlydude/DSCN0...
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f256/deadlydude/DSCN0...
January 4, 2007 9:37:12 PM

Hey thanks for the replies :) 

I'll try that tonight then.
with the RAM - do you always just leave it set to the settings that are specified on it? (ie: 5.5.5.15)

Also, could you explain what effect increasing the voltage is having?

What are the risks of it and what am I gaining by doing it?
Trying to understand what I'm doing as much as just doing it.
January 4, 2007 9:43:32 PM

Also,
what are the differences between using say:

CPU Multiplier 8 x 400 FSB
vs
CPU Multiplier 7 x 457 FSB

for instance?
January 4, 2007 9:52:43 PM

Quote:
Hey thanks for the replies :) 

I'll try that tonight then.
with the RAM - do you always just leave it set to the settings that are specified on it? (ie: 5.5.5.15)

Also, could you explain what effect increasing the voltage is having?

What are the risks of it and what am I gaining by doing it?
Trying to understand what I'm doing as much as just doing it.



My Ram comes stock with those settings which are pretty loose. You may have to loosen yours up also. Not much of a performance hit, but looser helps overclocking

Increasing voltage allows the higher frequencies and overclocking to occur without timing problems interfering with execution. Higher voltages also generate more "Heat", which is usually the ultimate limitation on overclocking (assuming the ram and MB can take the higher frequencies...Our set-up should be capable). The variable between our systems is the heat dissipation efficiency.

Monitor your core temps with "Intel Thermal Analysis Tool"...if you can find it. Or use Core Temp...here:
http://www.thecoolest.zerobrains.com/CoreTemp/

The risk is damageing a CPU by heat. Stay below 65C to be safe.

The rewards are sense of accomplishment....faster game play?...faster PC for cheaper price!
January 4, 2007 10:20:26 PM

glad to see you're still around.

One thing I noticed with that Core Temp app when I used it last night was that it gives the temperature of each core.

These are typically extremely high (65 or so) whereas the temperature of my CPU as given my Gigabyte's own app is around 40*.

Obviously these are measuring different spots but I'm just a little alarmed by the 65 value.

Should I ignore this or if not, whats the highest each core should be getting to before I start getting worried?

also - with the point about say 8x400 vs 7x457 - whats the diff?
January 4, 2007 10:57:02 PM

Quote:
glad to see you're still around.

One thing I noticed with that Core Temp app when I used it last night was that it gives the temperature of each core.

These are typically extremely high (65 or so) whereas the temperature of my CPU as given my Gigabyte's own app is around 40*.

Obviously these are measuring different spots but I'm just a little alarmed by the 65 value.

Should I ignore this or if not, whats the highest each core should be getting to before I start getting worried?

also - with the point about say 8x400 vs 7x457 - whats the diff?



You are close to max temp...Core Temp is accurate., That other reading is on motherboard. away from cpu core.

Looks like you need an aftermarket cpu cooler (air, not water). That may give you ten more degrees to play with. (oops just saw you have a good cooler) maybe re-mount it...

8x400=3.2gig
7x457= 3.2gig

They are the same, just different ways to get there...
January 4, 2007 11:04:43 PM

U sure?
What does core temp say for your core temperatures?

If I go into the BIOS as well it's reporting a CPU temp of 40 which is what the Gigabyte temp is saying.
January 5, 2007 1:17:53 AM

My temps are 50C idle, 60C under load.

Core temp is the closest you will get to the real CPU temp.


Get the Intel Thermal Analysis Tooltool:
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/392

It will agree with Core Temp within a degree or two.

Also... you have a 6400...doesn't that take a normal multiplier of 8?

If you use 8 rather than 7, the FSB will be lower for the same end result.
8x(FSB)400=3.2gig
7x(FSB)457= 3.2gig
That will allow the ram to operate at a lower frequencey rather than pushing it beyond its normal rated (800mhz) frequency limits.
a b K Overclocking
January 5, 2007 2:47:22 AM

BIOS + ~ 15c = Core Temp. Intel's Thermal Specification for the E6400 is 61.4c as per the following link:

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL9...

Quote:
Thermal Specification: The thermal specification shown is the maximum case temperature at the maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) value for that processor. It is measured at the geometric center on the topside of the processor integrated heat spreader. For processors without integrated heat spreaders such as mobile processors, the thermal specification is referred to as the junction temperature (Tj). The maximum junction temperature is defined by an activation of the processor Intel® Thermal Monitor. The Intel Thermal Monitor’s automatic mode is used to indicate that the maximum TJ has been reached.


The first part of the spec implies a single measuring point, which would be in contact with the CPU cooler, via the heat sink compound. Since there is no sensor at this measuring point, then it would seem that BIOS temps are indicated from CPU look-up tables, using the motherboard's socket temp sensor, to simulate this single measuring point.

Wusy's Overclocking Guide suggests using Core Temp, which is similar to Intel's Thermal Analysis Tool, (TAT). Since the second part of the spec refers to mobile CPU's measured at junction temperature (Tj) with Intel's Thermal Monitor (TAT), and Core Temp measures internal CPU core (Tj) sensors, then this spec is 85c, as displayed in Core Temp.

Obviously, there is some ambiguity here. Since Core Temp and TAT display nearly identical temps, and TAT's help menu identifies it as a Notebook tool, then is TAT invalid when used on Desktop CPU's? It's unclear as to how the ~ 15c difference between BIOS and Core Temp/TAT should be correctly interpreted. When we increase vCore and clock frequency at 100% load, we exceed TDP, so how much additional tolerance above or below which spec should apply in real-world computing environments with irregular core loads?

I'm currently researching this topic. :?
January 5, 2007 2:59:54 AM

thanks for the reply.

I heard a loud 'whoosh' sound as I read that and it flew over my head :p  lol.
Could be due to the huge lack of sleep I've had all week.

If I interpret that correctly, what your saying is that in theory, the 60 my core is giving me is what intel recommends as the temp that they should run at.

I am allowed roughly a 15* variance on that giving me up to a max of around 75 for that core reading?

Is that right or are you saying the 60 it's telling me is the max it should be going up to?
a b K Overclocking
January 5, 2007 3:31:56 AM

Quote:
If I interpret that correctly, what your saying is that in theory, the 60 my core is giving me is what intel recommends as the temp that they should run at.

I am allowed roughly a 15* variance on that giving me up to a max of around 75 for that core reading?

Is that right or are you saying the 60 it's telling me is the max it should be going up to?


The 60c spec would be a maximum recommended temp. The notebook spec, as per Intel's Thermal Analysis Tool (TAT), and as displayed in Core Temp within a few degrees, shows the Junction Temp (Tj) limit as 85c. This is an absolute limit. If exceeded, CPU shut down will occur.

I question the validity of TAT on desktop CPU's, because it's described in it's help menu as requiring a notebook, and is defined as a notebook tool. Since Core Temp shows nearly identical results, and I'm not sure how it's calibrated compared to TAT, I'm questioning all firmware and software temperature monitoring at this time. :? :? :?

There presently seems to be multiple temperature monitoring standards and spec limits. We have BIOS, SpeedFan, Thermal Analysis Tool, Core Temp, and of course, every motherboard manufacturer has their own utility. My research continues...but this topic may require further discussion on it's own thread. :wink:
January 5, 2007 4:27:04 AM

Nooo,
leave it in this thread so I get notified of replies :) 

If you get any more info about what temps are what and so what temps I need to be keeping at what lvl's I'd be grateful.

Right now I'm thinking if I keep the temp as specified in my BIOS below 60 I should be ok.
January 5, 2007 12:16:51 PM

CompuTronix:

There is a nice informative Intel thread on exactly how to read the Digital Temperature Sensor (DTS) and correctly calculate the processor temperature (see second to last post) :
http://softwareforums.intel.com/ISN/Community/en-US/for...

It looks like CoreTemp utility is making a proper reading. I suspect TAT is also.
a b K Overclocking
January 5, 2007 12:32:23 PM

Thanks very much for that link. Basically, Intel Engineering is saying that the maximum Junction Temperature (Tj max) for the Conre and Allendale cores are 85c, so there it is.
January 5, 2007 12:55:28 PM

Quote:
Nooo,
leave it in this thread so I get notified of replies :) 

...Right now I'm thinking if I keep the temp as specified in my BIOS below 60 I should be ok.


Well, the engineering community has weighed in and has the technical skinny, which is good for those of us who insist on pushing the envelope and testing fate. But, what temp is ok, you ask?

I think CompuTronix will agree that it depends on what risk your willing to take. CoreTemp reading of 60C is probably safe. I'm running that at load and no problems to date. I will probably push further (I tried without raising volts anymore and crashed so as I raise volts my temps will start to get dangerous 8)

Enjoy!! and good luck!
January 5, 2007 10:26:39 PM

I'm a bit surprised your temps arre that high at stock settings. I'm running around 55C @ idle with my 6300 @ 3.01. Maybe the 6400 runs hotter, but I wouldn't think so. I'd think your temps would be higher if your HSF weren't installed properly, but you might check it. If you do take it off and reset it, remember to clean the old thermal pad stuff off and apply new thermal compound. A good themal like Arctic Silver 5 may help to lower your temps some as well.

I believe it was Wiz83 that had a good OC guide for the S3 mobo in the OC/CPU section. I used that on top of wusy's guide to tweak my OC higher and lower my vcore below stock. I'll see if I can find the link and post it here.
January 5, 2007 10:41:05 PM

Here's the link. Skip thru the hardware stuff at the top. Like I said, it helped me out a bit, hopefully it will you as well since it's geared towards the S3.

Click me please

Just a curiosity question, but anyone else with the S3 not have to hit Ctrl F1 to get to the MIT? I didn't on mine. Not unless you only have to do it once the first time, and I just didn't notice it wasn't there.
January 5, 2007 11:05:28 PM

well this is a bit worrying then.
I loaded up Intels Thermal Analysis tool and its reporting a temperature of 74 for each core.
I put the workload level to 100% and set it off and it started going up past 80.

I'm gonna re-seat my heatsink and measure it again.
I dont know why it would be so high with such a good heat sink on it :( 
January 6, 2007 12:01:48 AM

Re-seated it and my temp is 67* now with both.
Under full load this is rising to 79*.

Any suggestions what I might be doing wrong?

Gigabytes Hardware Monitor is still telling me CPU temp without load is 35/36.

GRRR!!
January 6, 2007 1:11:44 AM

Quote:
Re-seated it and my temp is 67* now with both.
Under full load this is rising to 79*.

Any suggestions what I might be doing wrong?

Gigabytes Hardware Monitor is still telling me CPU temp without load is 35/36.

GRRR!!



Did you lower your Vcore? that temp is still way to high....post your bios settings
a b K Overclocking
January 6, 2007 1:42:27 AM

CPU Temps *C.

BIOS/CoreTemp
-60--/--75--75--
-55--/--70--70--
-50--/--65--65-- Load
-45--/--60--60--
-40--/--55--55--
-35--/--50--50--
-30--/--45--45-- Idle

8)
January 6, 2007 11:07:01 AM

All the settings in the BIOS are default settings.

It's not at all OC'd right now.
January 6, 2007 3:25:36 PM

Quote:
Re-seated it and my temp is 67* now with both.
Under full load this is rising to 79*.

Any suggestions what I might be doing wrong?

Gigabytes Hardware Monitor is still telling me CPU temp without load is 35/36.

GRRR!!


So to summerize, the bios is at default settings and your temps are as shown above?

When you reseated it, did you remove old thermal grease and replace it?

Something is not right...
January 6, 2007 3:30:49 PM

I am a bit confused because the settings Cougar posted are for 945P-DS3 and not for S3. Can you use them in S3 too?

The boards are not the same I have the cheaper one and you can't for example set the CPU multiplier (you can in DS3).
Got a question regarding this: How does the mobo choose the automatic CPU multiplier?

Besides I am also planning to OC.

I got:
6300 C2d CPU with Arctic Freezer
945P-S3
OCZ PC2-5300

got some chipset cooling solutions I will mount them before OCing cause I heard the 945P-S3 Northbridge gets extremely hot when OCing even to the point where it's unstable.

I thought of OCing to maybe 350 Mhz x7

but as I am a complete noob regarding OC I am not sure yet and currently reading all those THG articles and through the forumz
January 6, 2007 4:26:58 PM

Quote:
I am a bit confused because the settings Cougar posted are for 945P-DS3 and not for S3. Can you use them in S3 too?

The boards are not the same I have the cheaper one and you can't for example set the CPU multiplier (you can in DS3).
Got a question regarding this: How does the mobo choose the automatic CPU multiplier?

Besides I am also planning to OC.

I got:
6300 C2d CPU with Arctic Freezer
945P-S3
OCZ PC2-5300

got some chipset cooling solutions I will mount them before OCing cause I heard the 945P-S3 Northbridge gets extremely hot when OCing even to the point where it's unstable.

I thought of OCing to maybe 400 Mhz x7
and the RAM from 333 to 400

but as I am a complete noob regarding OC I am not sure yet and currently reading all those THG articles and through the forumz



You have a 945P and not a 965P. I think there is a big difference especially overclocking.

This article seems to talk to the deferences between the two.

http://www.neoseeker.com/resourcelink.html?rid=128635

I would Look for threads on this forum specifically addressing the 945P
January 6, 2007 4:35:01 PM

ah youre right I think I misread something

(model numbers can be confusing :-) )

thanks
January 6, 2007 11:57:29 PM

Quote:
Re-seated it and my temp is 67* now with both.
Under full load this is rising to 79*.

Any suggestions what I might be doing wrong?

Gigabytes Hardware Monitor is still telling me CPU temp without load is 35/36.

GRRR!!


So to summerize, the bios is at default settings and your temps are as shown above?

When you reseated it, did you remove old thermal grease and replace it?

Something is not right...

I ditto that. Those temperatures are too high at stock. You should clean it with acetone or TIM remover and then reapply TIM (AS5) and attach the heatsink again.

If you didn't do that, it will cause havoc with your temperature and subsequently your core 2 duo.

If you aren't able to achieve an overclock past 400mhz FSB, try 425mhz FSB with 5-5-5-15 timings, increase voltage of memory by +5, increase MCH by +1, increase vcore to 1.45. This may have something to do with a memory strap where there are certain ranges where your system will not post and go into a reboot loop.

TRY 425mhz. Skip 400-424. Hope all goes well. Make sure you fix your temperature problem first.
January 27, 2007 5:11:34 AM

FINALLY got around to doing this.

Took out the CPU, cleaned the thermal paste and re-pasted it then re-mounted the heatsink.


Intel TAT is now giving me 74* and 73* as my Core temp's under full load.
Under normal load this is dropping down to low 60's.

Still miles higher than you guys seem to be expecting me to have??

EasyTune 5's health monitor is telling me my CPU temp is: 31* under no load.


There's still that MASSIVE difference between the two temps and if it wasn't for things like the intel TAT I'd think I had a great super low temp for my system.


Not sure whats going on - any more ideas?
January 27, 2007 11:10:31 PM

Thats giving me 63* and 65* as my temps.

Also remember though that its the middle of summer here with these temps.


But yeah - no idea why there's such a MASSIVE difference between the two CPU temps :( 
a b K Overclocking
January 28, 2007 2:33:45 AM

Quote:
FINALLY got around to doing this.

Took out the CPU, cleaned the thermal paste and re-pasted it then re-mounted the heatsink.

Intel TAT is now giving me 74* and 73* as my Core temp's under full load.
Under normal load this is dropping down to low 60's.

Still miles higher than you guys seem to be expecting me to have??

EasyTune 5's health monitor is telling me my CPU temp is: 31* under no load.

There's still that MASSIVE difference between the two temps and if it wasn't for things like the intel TAT I'd think I had a great super low temp for my system.

Not sure whats going on - any more ideas?


nila, thanks for starting this thread. Since then, I've made it my mission to research CPU temperatures, thermal testing and measuring methods. Some of this appears above, on the previous page, and in other threads. Sorry if any of this material seems redundant, but I wrote it for the benefit of everyone:

Core 2 Duo Temperature Guide

I think this will help you make sense of your temperature situation. 8)
January 28, 2007 10:56:13 AM

It explains it great and is probably the most detailed description I've ever read.

It just means my results are even more confusing though.

I'm showing a roughly > 30* temp diff between the TAT and Hardware Monitor tool.
My system itself is showing at 43* and I just re-seated the whole CPU and am using an expensive heat sink with silver 5 thermal paste yet I'm having these huge core temp's.

Until I can sort something out and try work out how to get them lower I cant even really think about OC'ing as it'd just take me way into the dangerous temperature ranges.

My Core temps gotta get down to 55 from 70 somehow??

Also I'm slightly confused as in the past before tools like TAT came out, people OC'd and judged their system from all the tools like the hardware monitor's and they worked fine.

If people were seeing this 37* temp from the hardware monitor they'd say they had loads of range left to OC with and they were right.

I really dont know what to do to try get this core temp lower so please keep throwing ideas at me.

The system temp is 43 and the CPU temp (hardware monitor) is 38.

TAT is giving me 70 though (encoding some video at the moment).

I really want to get this sorted so please keep throwing advice and ideas at me.

Thanks
a b K Overclocking
January 28, 2007 11:57:45 AM

The example I show in my above post is from my rig, so with TAT at 100%, I'm 67c in Core Temp, and 52c in BIOS, which I display with SpeedFan. Considering I'm OC'd to the hilt at 3.7, and 1.5125 Vcore in BIOS is actually 1.48 ~ 1.5, I'm only able to hold those temps because I was fortunate to receive an unusually clean CPU, my case is extremely well ventilated, and my ambient is almost always 22c.

What is your ambient?
January 28, 2007 12:41:49 PM

Ambient meaning what?
The temperature of the apartment is probably reasonably hot as the weather here in sydney is pretty hot these days.
January 29, 2007 11:55:22 AM

Check out this for a perfect example of what I mean with how nuts it is with my temps:



One looks like a pretty damn awesome temp to be having and is what I'd be hoping to get with this CPU and heatsink combo - the others look scarily high!! :( 
a b K Overclocking
January 29, 2007 11:00:47 PM

Please tell us what your room temperature (ambient) was when you took those screen shots. I have some thoughts on what the problem may be, but I'll reserve my comments until I know your room temp. 8)
January 29, 2007 11:08:21 PM

Not too sure - the AC was on last night so it was fairly cool but I'll need to get some sort of thermostat.

What's your idea, lets hear it anyway.
a b K Overclocking
January 30, 2007 8:54:11 AM

Here's another thread with the same problem on an E6600 with a Gigabyte motherboard:

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

I'm beginning to think that either you've got a bad E6400, or you've got a problematic motherboard. :? I just checked Gigabyte's website and discovered they don't host a forum. 8O Have you flashed the BIOS? Have you Googled for this problem?
February 2, 2007 11:27:41 AM

Slight update - just loaded up Everest Ultimate Edition which gives me all my system temps (bios temp as well as the core temps) and noticed something very strange.
Its reporting that my system is 10* hotter than my CPU.

Here are the temps:

MoBo: 43 / 109
CPU: 34 / 91
CPU #1 66 / 151
CPU #2 65 / 149
GPU: 61 / 142
HD1: 36 / 97
HD2: 38 / 100
HD3: 38 / 100
HD4: 43 / 109



Hoping this might give some more ideas? I'm still stuck on this :( 
!