Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

E6600: Is my vcore safe for 24/7 usage? Advice Needed.

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Overclocking
  • Product
Last response: in Overclocking
Share
January 5, 2007 7:39:27 PM

Hello all.

Im currently running my E6600 at 3.40GHz at 1.52v. My temps are 43c idle and about 48c-50c full load. Is my vcore safe for 24/7 usage? Will 1.52v fry my chip given my temps? I cannot run a lower vcore becuase ill get crashes in certain games.

Also ive just discovered that the option "C1E Enhanced Halt State" was enabled in the BIOS. Ive just disabled this, have I done the right thing? With that disabled will I have the ability to reduce my vcore and be stable?? Im not sure whether C1E has any influence on vcore and stability.

Help appreciated.

More about : e6600 vcore safe usage advice needed

a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 5, 2007 8:20:31 PM

Quote:
Im currently running my E6600 at 3.40GHz at 1.52v. My temps are 43c idle and about 48c-50c full load. Is my vcore safe for 24/7 usage? Will 1.52v fry my chip given my temps? I cannot run a lower vcore becuase ill get crashes in certain games.


1.5250 vCore is fairly high. Temps using which programs? Full load using which programs? The rule of thumb is .05 volts per 100Mhz, so if you back down to 3.2Ghz, your vCore should be about 1.4250, and your temps will drop significantly.

Quote:
Also ive just discovered that the option "C1E Enhanced Halt State" was enabled in the BIOS. Ive just disabled this, have I done the right thing? With that disabled will I have the ability to reduce my vcore and be stable?? Im not sure whether C1E has any influence on vcore and stability.


C1E should be disabled for stable overclocking, but has no effect on vCore. 8)
January 5, 2007 8:29:24 PM

43 deg at 1.52 is pretty low. i would also like too know what you are using to report your cpu temps. my 6600 is running @ 3.4 on 1.4v. gigabyte easy tune reports temps at idle to be 27deg celcius but everest and core temp both report 42deg. per core. this is with water cooling.
Related resources
January 5, 2007 9:00:19 PM

Im using CoreTemp.

Ok at 3.40GHz at 1.52v I ran Orthos Small FFTs for 7 mins and it failed. I backed off to 3.2GHz at 1.42v and ran it for 20 mins and stopped it without any errors!

Now im confused! Do you think the higher vcore and higher temp is making the chip unstable at 3.4GHz??
January 5, 2007 9:15:45 PM

there are too many variables to say. what board and ram are you using? are your memory timings the problem? i don't think you should need that kind of voltage too get to 3.4 as a lot of people report doing so on stock voltage.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 5, 2007 9:25:00 PM

Quote:
I backed off to 3.2GHz at 1.42v and ran it for 20 mins and stopped it without any errors!

Do you think the higher vcore and higher temp is making the chip unstable at 3.4GHz??


Yes. > vCore = > temp = > resistance = > temp ... You're running stable and cooler, so I think you're closer to the sweet spot. As a rule of thumb, .05 vCore = 100Mhz, so you might be able to fine tune at 3.3Ghz with 1.475 vCore and still have good temps. :D 
January 5, 2007 10:04:15 PM

Im using EVGA 680i mobo and Crucial PC5300 10th Anniversary D9 ICs.

Do you think 3.3 is my max??
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 5, 2007 10:33:50 PM

Best stable max...yes, or perhaps for a touch of numerical symetry, 3.33Ghz at 370Mhz FSB.
January 5, 2007 11:10:19 PM

use core temp and if your temps are 57 to 60C full load priority 9 on orthos or two instances prime 95 for at least an overnight run your fine at that setting.
C1E should be disabled overclocked for stability.
January 5, 2007 11:15:05 PM

Quote:
use core temp and if your temps are 57 to 60C full load priority 9 on orthos or two instances prime 95 for at least an overnight run your fine at that setting.
C1E should be disabled overclocked for stability.


Why Priority 9 on Orthos? I always run it at pri 1 and it gets much hotter there. Is Pri 9 more representative of a real world full load? If so, I will start using that. I ask these questions because I don't know.

Tom
January 6, 2007 12:05:04 AM

Quote:
there are too many variables to say. what board and ram are you using? are your memory timings the problem? i don't think you should need that kind of voltage too get to 3.4 as a lot of people report doing so on stock voltage.


I agree. His core should be lowered. The memory is rated at DDR2-667 3-3-3-12 using 2.2V. If not set manually, the motherboard will most likely under volt the memory and set the timings in the area of cas 5. You really should set it manually for better stability. Something in the area of 2.2volts with a 4-4-4-12 timing. Try that @ 3400MHz.
January 6, 2007 1:03:22 AM

Quote:
Ok at 3.40GHz at 1.52v I ran Orthos Small FFTs for 7 mins and it failed. I backed off to 3.2GHz at 1.42v and ran it for 20 mins and stopped it without any errors!

Now im confused! Do you think the higher vcore and higher temp is making the chip unstable at 3.4GHz??


So 3.4ghz and 1.52v isn't stable... I'd start by taking a step back.

It sounds like 3.2ghz and 1.42v is stable, though 20 mins isn't a real test. Start by making sure you can't get stability with a lower vcore. Then move on to 3.3ghz tweaking as necessary to attain stability. Move forward using baby steps.

Side note: If you're aren't using it, introduce memtest86 as part of your testing regimen.
January 6, 2007 1:09:01 AM

Definetily your vcore is too high. do you think you can tell us more details of your overclocking?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 6, 2007 1:53:42 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 2:21:13 AM

The higher the priority the less likely other programs will try to access the CPU during prime.
Priority 10 being the highest.
To evo4ever
The object is to get your best overclock with the least amount of voltage to your System with the lowest latencies possible and stabile.
Your Vcore is slightly elevated for average to moderate overclocking but not all systems react the same way.
The Vcore you listed is safe and that’s what you originally were concerned with.
With all that said I must remind you that there is always a chance you may shorten the life expectancy of your system when you overclock but with the advice given here from many experienced users you can protect your investment by following a few guidelines.
Stay within the thermal limitations of the CPU (60.1C) and the
Absolute maximum Vcore of 1.55Volts both set by Intel as Max values.
Anything outside of these ranges is asking for trouble not that I personally pay attention to them but just the same it’s your investment
January 6, 2007 4:10:43 AM

Quote:
Hello all.

Im currently running my E6600 at 3.40GHz at 1.52v. My temps are 43c idle and about 48c-50c full load. Is my vcore safe for 24/7 usage? Will 1.52v fry my chip given my temps? I cannot run a lower vcore becuase ill get crashes in certain games.
Help appreciated.


Is it 1.52v in BIOS or actual voltage at full load?
January 7, 2007 8:12:03 PM

Quote:
Definetily your vcore is too high. do you think you can tell us more details of your overclocking?


Im running my memory and cpu in unlinked mode (asynchronously). Theres no such thing as memory dividers in this mode, you set what speed you want the memory to run at and you set the FSB to what you want the cpu to run at, separately.

Im running my memory at 800mhz, timings 4-4-4-12 2T, 2.2v vdimm.

What else do you wanna know?
January 8, 2007 11:34:42 AM

Someone said 20mins isnt long enough to stress the CPU, so I ran Orthos Small FFTs again for 1 hour and 12 mins without errors! Do you think thats long enough?

Also Im running my RAM at default speeds (667mhz, 3-3-3-12 1T 2.2v) to eliminate any RAM instabilities while overclocking the CPU.

Im now comfortable that 3.2GHz at 1.42v is stable, what shall I do now?
January 8, 2007 11:57:18 AM

Nope .. not enough... Normally, people would run Orthor at least 8hrs (upto 24hrs)
January 8, 2007 5:06:22 PM

Quote:
Nope .. not enough... Normally, people would run Orthor at least 8hrs (upto 24hrs)


What if I havnt got that kind of time to test? Is Small FFTs better than Gromacs Core?
a c 145 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 8, 2007 5:39:06 PM

Try large tft's or blend....

I was able to run smallTFTs for hours(9 or so).....but largeTFT errors out after less than an hour....@ 3.0 on stock...i blame the board giving lower voltage than the bios says....but i have not got to test it....
January 8, 2007 5:40:35 PM

Well I'm using my E6600 @ 3,6 Ghz with a vCore of 1,575 in the BIOS... I've read that it's all about the temperature... At 1,575 vCore, my CPU is at 50 degrees (Cores are at 65 degrees) at full load Orthos Priority 9 and is fully stable... so I don't really care about my voltage :) 
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 8, 2007 6:07:44 PM

What are you using to test "full load"??? 8O
January 8, 2007 6:42:48 PM

Quote:
Nope .. not enough... Normally, people would run Orthor at least 8hrs (upto 24hrs)


What if I havnt got that kind of time to test? Is Small FFTs better than Gromacs Core?

Leave it running over night .. :D 

Like others said .. try to run blend or large .. With small, it ain't test your RAM much ... Hey, RAM definitely needs to test also ....

Bordy ... how about priority 1 .. :D  .... yep .. I tested mine (E6400 + P5B Dlx) at priority 5 with no issue for 14hrs.. once changed it to P1 .. shooooooottt .. error after 5hrs ... :D 
January 8, 2007 7:27:06 PM

Quote:


Im currently running my E6600 at 3.40GHz at 1.52v. My temps are 43c idle and about 48c-50c full load. Is my vcore safe for 24/7 usage? Will 1.52v fry my chip given my temps? I cannot run a lower vcore becuase ill get crashes in certain games.



Good question guy, I have a E6400 @3.6Ghz 1800FSB thats how the 680i Evga SLI bios reporst FSB which is really 450. My voltage is 1.525v which is set in the Bios. The machine runs stable with all games and apps and is water cooled. RivaTuner with C2D plugin shows each core running 43C-45C at idle and 53C-55C at full load and it does not really matter what its running benchmarks or heavy apps. Nvidia monitor says between 32C-42C when idle to load. The temps drop instantly after dropping CPU load.

I have read everywhere I could find about temperatures and mine are low compared to some I have seen reported at up to 70C. Seeing as its an E6400, if it blows which I doubt, it was still a bargain. Also, lowering the voltage makes the system unstable after a while and has no real effect on temperatures. I have a very good 1/2" water cooling system so efficiency on that is probably already maxed out.

Also, I had a bios setting which escapes me at the moment which auto increased the CPU voltage when enabled. I had the voltage set to 1.45v at one time and was confused because Nvidia monitor was reporting CPU voltage of 1.52v. I went back to the bios and sure enough, the voltage was set to 1.45v but was showing actual voltage of 1.52v. I figured this was part of the Nvidia auto tunning features and it was auto compensating for the high FSB.

My 8800GTX does something similar with its internal clock. You can set it to 650Mhz GPU and 1000Mhz Memory but as soon as it goes into 3D mode, the internal Memory clock goes up from 1350Mhz to 1525Mhz which Nvidia monitor says is out of spec. But the card runs fine no crashes and temps up to 63C with 50C at idle.

I'm still figuring out settings but the way the settings interact doesn't always make sense and its hard to find an app with monitors you can trust.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 9, 2007 12:08:42 AM

Quote:
I have a E6400 @3.6Ghz... My voltage is 1.525v which is set in the Bios. The machine runs stable with all games and apps and is water cooled. RivaTuner with C2D plugin shows each core running 43C-45C at idle and 53C-55C at full load and it does not really matter what its running benchmarks or heavy apps. Nvidia monitor says between 32C-42C when idle to load. The temps drop instantly after dropping CPU load.

I have read everywhere I could find about temperatures and mine are low compared to some I have seen reported at up to 70C.


The following topic should answer your questions.

Core 2 Duo Temperature Guide

Hope this helps. 8)
January 9, 2007 12:48:39 AM

Problem is that we cannot run TAT on all board .... specially, those boards with nvidia chipsets
January 9, 2007 1:47:06 AM

Orthos Blend or Large FFTs Priority 9...
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 9, 2007 1:59:30 AM

Quote:
Orthos Blend or Large FFTs Priority 9...


I just retested Orthos in both modes against TAT, and confirmed my previous findings. Neither modes load the cores to 100%. Orthos run the cores ~ 7c lower than TAT. Test it on that 1.575 vCore you're running, you'll see what I mean. Use Core Temp to monitor your highest core. 8)
January 9, 2007 2:34:42 AM

Dude, not looking to bust your bubble or anything, but I have an E6300 on an eVGA 680i MB, and right now it's at 3.15GHz on 1.408v; stock HSF at 42C (it's doing some other work right now, but it was in the upper 30s a little bit ago).


I had it over 3.3GHz earlier and passing all stress tests, but when I rebooted it wouldn't!? I think somehow I forgot to readjust the v's after it went into safe mode.

Glad I saved the $$ by getting the E6300!
January 9, 2007 2:35:54 AM

I run my x2 4400+at 2.570ghz.with a 1.553 core voltage.If you had higher temps than what you have I might be worried,but with no more than 50 celcius or even up to 55 celcius,I would not worry bout frying your chip.You processor should be good for at least 4-5years if not longer.Goodluck.

Dahak

AMD X2-4400+@2.570 S-939
EVGA NF4 SLI MB
2X EVGA 7800GT IN SLI
2X1GIG DDR IN DC MODE
WD300GIG HD
EXTREME 19IN.MONITOR 1280X1024
ACE 520WATT PSU
COOLERMASTER MINI R120
January 9, 2007 2:38:00 AM

Quote:
Dude, not looking to bust your bubble or anything, but I have an E6300 on an eVGA 680i MB, and right now it's at 3.15GHz on 1.408v; stock HSF at 42C (it's doing some other work right now, but it was in the upper 30s a little bit ago).


I had it over 3.3GHz earlier and passing all stress tests, but when I rebooted it wouldn't!? I think somehow I forgot to readjust the v's after it went into safe mode.

Glad I saved the $$ by getting the E6300!


We're all happy for ya. The braggin' thread is just down the hall.

Tom
January 9, 2007 2:44:06 AM

Dude it might be because since I'm using a Thermalright Ultra 120, even with a higher volatge than u, my cores temperatures are lower than yours and that doesn't mean I haven't test my system as it should be... I've been running Orthos Blend priority 9 for 10 hours without any problems...

Cheers
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 9, 2007 2:51:48 AM

Quote:
Dude it might be because since I'm using a Thermalright Ultra 120, even with a higher volatge than u, my cores temperatures are lower than yours and that doesn't mean I haven't test my system as it should be... I've been running Orthos Blend priority 9 for 10 hours without any problems...


My objective is to help eliminate the confusion, because there's no standardized testing methods, so everyone's comparing their apples to oranges, and every other variety of fruit on God's green earth.

My point to you is that if you run TAT, and use Core Temp to read the hottest core, you will see the results are ~ 7c higher than Orthos with Core Temp. I'm glad your rig runs great with no problems, but run TAT/Core Temp so we can see your results. 8)
January 9, 2007 2:53:03 AM

Dude, I am seeing the same crap problems with NTune and NMonitor that you are! Settings don't always stay set; certain numbers don't jive; etc.

One of my biggest peeves is that I set my CPU fan speed to 100% (it's still way quiet in my 900 case). Later on, I will check the CPU temps, and at idle I would find it at 52C! Turns out that some how the CPU fan speed went to 0%! Actually, 52C without a fan on stock HSF is pretty impressive!

I get the same shite when OCing the 8800GTS. One moment I have the GPU at over 700MHz and the Memclock at 972, the next, it's back to stock.

The Optimize section of NTune is crap too. WTF is it supposed to do anyhow?

Just my 2c.
January 9, 2007 3:06:53 AM

TAT is designed to test the thermal limitations of the CPU which I agree 100% is a good way to test the CPU.
For overclocking you want to use Ortho’s Priority 9 large ffts and stress some ram or blend test CPU and ram.
The object is to test the stability of your system not just one component.

You can run Priority 1 large ffts stress some ram fold@home and surf the net while playing games like Oblivion.

If you survive that for 10 hours you have accomplished your goal. :wink:
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 9, 2007 3:32:27 AM

Quote:
TAT is designed to test the thermal limitations of the CPU which I agree 100% is a good way to test the CPU.
For overclocking you want to use Ortho’s Priority 9 large ffts and stress some ram or blend test CPU and ram.
The object is to test the stability of your system not just one component.


I agree with you kwalker. The terms "load" and "full load" are being tossed around so freely, and without definition, that many people are confused, and rightly so, regarding what constitutes good temps. It would help to use standardized thermal testing methods to identify CPU and case cooling deficiencies, so we can all be on the same page. 8)
January 9, 2007 3:35:10 AM

Oki I will try :) 
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 9, 2007 3:38:14 AM

Thanks bordy...I'm interested to see your results.
January 9, 2007 3:42:02 AM

I agree. BUt I also think TAT is an unrealistic measure of how high you can safely overclock.

I was running Prime 95 (1 on each core), Orthos, SuperPi, PC World Burn in Test and Everest Stability Test all at the same time. CPU core temps never got over 60C. Ran TAT all by itself and the CPU core temps went to 67C. Running Oblivion at max, I never recorded a core temp over 48C. Doing a 2 minute automated task in Photoshop, temps never came off 38C. If you can remain running with TAT, you can handle the thermal load from anything.

That being said, I could run TAT and stay at 67C, but not pass Prime95 or memtest.

But, your premise is germane insofar as thermal data should be reported with all relavant controls.

My temps (measured with Core Temp)

35C Idle
58C Load (under Orthos, priority 1, 10 minutes stable)

Or I could list this:

32C Idle
48C load

Without that extra info, the second set of data are worthless (it's BIOS temps with PECI enabled with an Orthos Pri 1 load). But those second temps sure look good, don't they.

Bottom line, I agree with you. If you list an operating temp, please qualify it with a full set of conditions.

Tom
January 9, 2007 3:47:43 AM

I gotta agree with Tom... I just did a quick test on Large FFTs Priority 9 and I was getting about 48-52 degrees for each cores and then with TAT, my cores reach about 55-56 degrees instantatly... Something seems weird with these monitoring :?

BTW these results were done on 3,2 GHz (400 x 8) @ 1,425 voltage... (because 1,575v vCore scares me a bit :p )

BTW Is it true that what is gonna kill your CPU is the temperature and not the voltage... Exemple, I put 1,575 vCore but I do not run 24/7, only a few hours a day, and only for games and Net, my CPU will never have any problem?


8)
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 9, 2007 3:52:14 AM

Quote:
I gotta agree with Tom... I just did a quick test on Large FFTs Priority 9 and I was getting about 48-52 degrees for each cores and then with TAT, my cores reach about 55-56 degrees instantatly... Something seems weird with these monitoring


Nothing wierd. TAT is 100% continuous load on both cores, and Orthos core loads are somewhat lower. It's startling the first time you see it.

Quote:
BTW these results were done on 3,2 GHz (400 x @ 1,425 voltage... (because 1,575v vCore scares me a bit )


It gets my attention too. Your 1.575 Vcore is the highest C2D I've seen. THG OC'd the 6800 to 3.68Ghz at 1.4875 Vcore, which is 10% overvolt. I'm still not completely comfortable running at 1.5125, which is 11.8% overvolt. If you divide your Vcore by Intel's spec, then 1.575 / 1.3525 = 16.5% overvolt. Way above 10% tolerance.

Quote:
BTW Is it true that what is gonna kill your CPU is the temperature and not the voltage... Exemple, I put 1,575 vCore but I do not run 24/7, only a few hours a day, and only for games and Net, my CPU will never have any problem?


Jack wrote an excellent post for another thread regarding electromigration. Pick it out and have a good read, then decide for yourself.

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

Hope this helps. 8)
January 9, 2007 4:52:38 AM

This is not totally directed at you.
I thought I would just interject


Everyone’s needs are different and you’re right about the loose definitions of load temps and idle temps.
That’s why there’s no room for error and no need to exaggerate your results as it only hurts yourself.
There should be a standard as you stated.
But the bottom Line is Stability
This is one test of many.


This run is without blend testing ram but notice the little red Icon on the lower right bottom toolbar.
Folding@home running Ortho’s and using the computer Hard 8 hours straight.
I even got in 2 hours of Oblivion.
This is how I Burn in my Overclock projects.
Slow and agonizing with multiple blends of testing software.
The end results are no data loss.
No drive disconnects or lost LAN ports.
No lock ups or lost overclock on reboot.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 9, 2007 6:31:58 AM

I agree with you again, kwalker. Stability is one of the end results of a successful OC. Solid temps are a prerequisite for OC stability, so if you can hold close to 65c with TAT/Core Temp, then you've found the extreme thermal performance benchmarks for your OC & CPU cooler & case combination. This is the ultimate stress test to quicly determine if CPU cooling is adequate, which is critical for stability.

If the thermal spec's and scale are known, and you know the CPU will never be loaded so heavily as TAT, then you feel confident in the thermal capabilities of your C2D. Tools for the toolbox are always welcome, and techniques to best utilize the tools at hand, so we can all get the best performance from our rigs, and hopefully make it a little easier for those trying to complete their first build and OC. :D 
January 9, 2007 7:09:57 PM

I know 1,575v seems a bit high but on Xtreme System lots of people are using their C2D @ 1,6 or 1,65v as vCore not to mention those with phase change or LN2 using 1,8+...
January 9, 2007 8:33:40 PM

Quote:
I know 1,575v seems a bit high but on Xtreme System lots of people are using their C2D @ 1,6 or 1,65v as vCore not to mention those with phase change or LN2 using 1,8+...


They aren't called "Xtreme Systems" for nothing 8)
January 10, 2007 4:18:07 AM

Quote:
I know 1,575v seems a bit high but on Xtreme System lots of people are using their C2D @ 1,6 or 1,65v as vCore not to mention those with phase change or LN2 using 1,8+...


They aren't called "Xtreme Systems" for nothing 8)

I am Xtreme as well buddy :lol:  8)
January 10, 2007 4:44:27 AM

Quote:
if you can hold close to 65c with TAT/Core Temp, then you've found the extreme thermal performance benchmarks for your OC & CPU cooler & case combination. This is the ultimate stress test to quicly determine if CPU cooling is adequate, which is critical for stability.


This I Agree should be the first step when you OC.
You are rarely going to see those thermal readings again after your final overclock and system stability is achieved.
The other benchmark tests that follow will make sure everything else is in line .
We are on the same page 8)
January 10, 2007 4:57:42 AM

Quote:
I know 1,575v seems a bit high but on Xtreme System lots of people are using their C2D @ 1,6 or 1,65v as vCore not to mention those with phase change or LN2 using 1,8+...


They aren't called "Xtreme Systems" for nothing 8)

I am Xtreme as well buddy :lol:  8)

Almost :wink:
Pushing the Vcore past 1.65 and higher with Vmods is mostly benching.
3.6 to 3.8GHz is a very good Oc for the Core2 but Extreme is much much more and unfortunately we must sacrifice a few mobos and ram in the process.
not for the weak at heart .
and man it gets expensive :D 
January 10, 2007 6:00:29 AM

@ kwalker

Does that imply that you are on some sort of overclocking team? or are you just an extreme enthusiast :?:
!