Hi Guys,
I apologise in advance for this noob question!
I'm running a Q6600 at stock with the Intel HSF and decided to look at giving the CPU a 'tweak' to help gain a few more FPS in Crysis. I knew I'd probably not get far, using the standard Intel HSF but thought I’d check it out.
Using the BIOS I up'd the FSB from 266, in stages, to 311, to get to the 3.0GHz speed. I know it's not the most 'efficient' way to overclock, but I set the voltage control to 'auto' so that BIOS worked out what volts I'd need to handle the extra o/c.
I ran a stress test using Prime 95 and, very soon, the CPU was registering 66-67 degrees (viewed via CoreTemp) so I thought this was a bit toasty, and perhaps a bit too near the 71C safe limit of the 'G0' version I have, so I shut the test down. I also ran a test at 2.8GHz and this ran at about 64-65C, so still hot.
I notice when I run Crysis, using an o/c to 3.0GHz, that CoreTemp shows the game running at about 57/58C which is perhaps acceptable. I measured this during a particularly ‘intensive’ part of the game, when the CPU was (hopefully) being pushed a bit.
I don't do a huge amount of multi-tasking - i.e. if I'm playing a game then I'm unlikely to be doing a virus scan or downloading huge files in the background, etc. I want to dedicate as much resource as possible to the game in hand…
…. With this in mind I’m just wondering how valid (to me, personally) the stress tests are? Just how ‘stressful’ for the CPU, etc, are (modern ‘high end’) PC games when compared to doing a test using the likes of Prime 95 or Orthos?
I know I haven’t o/c’d the system in the most efficient way (i.e. I understand that, if set to ‘auto voltage control’, the BIOS overcompensates on the voltage it requires and thus more heat is produced) but am I ‘safe’ in doing this? (PS. I’ve set PCI-e to ‘100Mhz’ to safeguard the GPU and a few other settings as recommended in the forums).
If any Crysis fans are interested, I was playing the game on Very High settings for everything (including Post Processing) but set Shadows to Medium (as they look pretty much the same as if on Very High), on 1024x768. The game ran at 31 FPS on average at stock 2.4Ghz speeds. Raising the CPU to 2.8GHz gave a 4 FPS gain. Raising to 3.0Ghz gave a 6 FPS gain. Not a huge jump I know but, when you are playing at the c30FPS level, the extra 6 FPS is a nice little performance jump and worth it.
Any help really appreciated! Cheers guys.
I apologise in advance for this noob question!
I'm running a Q6600 at stock with the Intel HSF and decided to look at giving the CPU a 'tweak' to help gain a few more FPS in Crysis. I knew I'd probably not get far, using the standard Intel HSF but thought I’d check it out.
Using the BIOS I up'd the FSB from 266, in stages, to 311, to get to the 3.0GHz speed. I know it's not the most 'efficient' way to overclock, but I set the voltage control to 'auto' so that BIOS worked out what volts I'd need to handle the extra o/c.
I ran a stress test using Prime 95 and, very soon, the CPU was registering 66-67 degrees (viewed via CoreTemp) so I thought this was a bit toasty, and perhaps a bit too near the 71C safe limit of the 'G0' version I have, so I shut the test down. I also ran a test at 2.8GHz and this ran at about 64-65C, so still hot.
I notice when I run Crysis, using an o/c to 3.0GHz, that CoreTemp shows the game running at about 57/58C which is perhaps acceptable. I measured this during a particularly ‘intensive’ part of the game, when the CPU was (hopefully) being pushed a bit.
I don't do a huge amount of multi-tasking - i.e. if I'm playing a game then I'm unlikely to be doing a virus scan or downloading huge files in the background, etc. I want to dedicate as much resource as possible to the game in hand…
…. With this in mind I’m just wondering how valid (to me, personally) the stress tests are? Just how ‘stressful’ for the CPU, etc, are (modern ‘high end’) PC games when compared to doing a test using the likes of Prime 95 or Orthos?
I know I haven’t o/c’d the system in the most efficient way (i.e. I understand that, if set to ‘auto voltage control’, the BIOS overcompensates on the voltage it requires and thus more heat is produced) but am I ‘safe’ in doing this? (PS. I’ve set PCI-e to ‘100Mhz’ to safeguard the GPU and a few other settings as recommended in the forums).
If any Crysis fans are interested, I was playing the game on Very High settings for everything (including Post Processing) but set Shadows to Medium (as they look pretty much the same as if on Very High), on 1024x768. The game ran at 31 FPS on average at stock 2.4Ghz speeds. Raising the CPU to 2.8GHz gave a 4 FPS gain. Raising to 3.0Ghz gave a 6 FPS gain. Not a huge jump I know but, when you are playing at the c30FPS level, the extra 6 FPS is a nice little performance jump and worth it.
Any help really appreciated! Cheers guys.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram