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

[nila]

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!

 

[deadlydude]

Try this as a good starting point:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=29&threadid=1908390&frmKeyword=&STARTPAGE=8&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
then scroll down to Kougar's post...he has bios shots of your mobo

 

[nila]

Try this as a good starting point:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=29&threadid=1908390&frmKeyword=&STARTPAGE=8&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
then scroll down to Kougar's post...he has bios shots of your mobo

Thanks but are you saying I should use the same settings as he has in his BIOS shots or what?

 

[deadlydude]

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.

 

[nila]

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_1814d.jpg
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n129/Chanur64/IMG_1825g.jpg

(those are his screen shots so the values I just tried that caused it to not boot)

 

[deadlydude]

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/DSCN0477.jpg
http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f256/deadlydude/DSCN0476.jpg

 

[nila]

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.

 

[nila]

Also,
what are the differences between using say:

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

for instance?

 

[deadlydude]

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!

 

[nila]

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?

 

[deadlydude]

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...

 

[nila]

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.

 

[deadlydude]

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.

 

[CompuTronix]

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=SL9S9

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. :?

 

[nila]

thanks for the reply.

I heard a loud 'whoosh' sound as I read that and it flew over my head 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?

 

[CompuTronix]

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.

 

[nila]

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.

 

[deadlydude]

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/forums/1/30222546/ShowThread.aspx

It looks like CoreTemp utility is making a proper reading. I suspect TAT is also.

 

[CompuTronix]

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.

 

[deadlydude]

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!

 

[AMDThunder]

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.

 

[AMDThunder]

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.

 

[nila]

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

 

[nila]

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!!

 

[deadlydude]

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