Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Overclocking q6600@3.0Ghz CPU Temp 68c on load ok?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
May 3, 2008 11:21:54 AM

Hello

I am new to overclocking, today i have overclocked my q6600 CPU@3.0Ghz with the stock cooler and after Stressing the CPU on full load for 3+ hours core temp has reported that core#0 has gone up to 68c, but average on load it will stay on 66c, on idle the CPU will stay on 40c, I am tight on budget but i don't want to burn the CPU, do i really need an after market cooler or can i stay with this one?

Ambient temperature is: 26c

Core voltage is: 1.3v (System is very stable with this voltage, had no blue screens or reboots so far)

Any help is appreciated

Cliffton
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 3, 2008 11:36:02 AM

That's pretty good asuming those temps are for very heavy load (such as using prime95). If that's for normal load (games etc) then it's a little high even for the stock cooler. It's well within safe limits either way, you could run that for years 24/7 no problem. If you were pushing 85C+ then you have a possible lifespan problem.
May 3, 2008 11:57:57 AM

I was using BurnInTest and CPU Stress was 100%, so its a very heavy load, I found that BurnInTest do heaver tests then prime95, Im a Computer Technician and i always use BurnInTest to test the hardware, anyway back to the subject, so 40c on idle and 68c (MAX on core#0) on heavy load is ok? it is money wise to invest in a cooler or should i stay with the stock?
Related resources
May 3, 2008 12:52:37 PM

I have AC turned on 24 hours/Day during summer @ 26c so Ambient temperature will always be the same, i need more opinions what they think on q6600 @ 66c on heavy Load (68c was max on Core#0 according to core temp)
May 3, 2008 1:17:30 PM

That temp is on the safe side, Although I would say it is ok to run it at those temps, I just dont think it is good for the proc running at 68C all the time. So if you Absolutely cannot buy an aftermarket cooler, its alright. You can still run those temps, but if you can afford an aftermarket cooler than go for it. It's better to be safe than sorry.

May 3, 2008 1:49:05 PM

i would suggest you getting a after market cooler. n try to keep urself at 60c. more than that. ill be very careful about it. dont want to cut the life span of the processor.
May 3, 2008 2:13:03 PM

that temp seems alright.the Q6600 will be stable anything under 70C for core.an aftermarket cooler will give you more benefit then AC+Stock HSF.:D 
May 3, 2008 2:29:37 PM

Three things come to mind
1. On board thermal measurement is + or - about 6 degrees C
2. Max temp for your cpu is roughly 71 C
3. CPU burn at 100% is an artificial tool which puts more heat into the cpu than any application or game could possibly do. If your measurements are on the safe side with CPU burn then you can be sure that it will be ok.

If you can measure the true speed of the cpu, the best way to see if the cpu is too hot is to see when it throttles back on the clock speed.

May 3, 2008 2:47:15 PM

I Also run a Q6600 G0 @3.15 MHz but I bought it OEM so I bought a cooler with it(Air) my temps range from about 40 C - 46C Idle and under full load(prime) 58-64 C so IMO it's worth 40-50 bucks to get an aftermarket cooler.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 2:03:29 AM

The max temp for his CPU (as in the cores themselves) is commonly believed to be 100C, but the only way to know that for sure is to push it to that temperature and record with accurate instruments at what temps it shuts down at. It is quite safe to run the CPU hot 24/7, if it wasn't then Intel would have set the thermal throttling temperatures lower than they are. What is important is what your normal load temps are, not just what the artificial load temps are.
May 4, 2008 4:52:54 AM

randomizer said:
push it to that temperature and record with accurate instruments at what temps it shuts down at.


well i dont think anyone would wanna try that.do you? :lol: 
May 4, 2008 5:02:17 AM

Like 87c your thermal control can kick in. TCase. Automatic Thermal Control that Can Not be disabled. It saves your A$$ when you cant get your water block to sit on the IHS because some capacitors decide that they are EXACTLY the height required to allow the block to sit firmly on it, but if you lap it and remove that hairs height layer from it, it no longer makes contact well at all!

Why the capacitors are 1/10th of an inch from the socket and line the whole side are beyond me on a semi decent board like the Maximus formula, when they say its made for OCing.

Hell, you stay the F away from that socket, if its for overclocking, obviously the buyer will need room for some kick a$$ cooling, right? But hey, I lapped it. I think I lapped them both, hehe.

Gotta get an extended base contact area water block, or another TRUE!

I Wuv Gillgill!

--Lupi!
May 4, 2008 5:05:02 AM

Lupiron said:


I Wuv Gillgill!



whats up with that?did you go and see my other thread about underclocking?Evilonigir is saying its dangerous.what do you think?
May 4, 2008 5:18:53 AM

::chuckles.:: Nope, just seen you going to work! Gonna put something on the OC competition thread? Who would want to under clock their chip? And my Low VID would make it easy for me! Its already at 1.16 in windows, drooped to 1.12 when LLC is set for intel spec.

I am sure it can go lower, but my chip isnt in a limbo contest, its in a mad man marathon of a race! To be the fastest around for your Type!

Run, Run, RUN Gillgill!

--Lupi!
May 4, 2008 5:24:44 AM

=.=" you always had to take a mikey out of my name isnt it?you wanna know who Gill is?haha she is actually a singer in HK.but she's faded now because some dirty picture scandle!lol
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 5:27:18 AM

iluvgillgill said:
well i dont think anyone would wanna try that.do you? :lol: 

I don't have the instruments, but yes, I'd do it. I have already taken my CPU to 2C below shutdown, didn't want to go higher simply because I didn't want it to shut down on me. It was only overclocked to 3GHz, but I decided I'd put 1.5V through it just for the heck of it, and the chip runs hot at stock as it is (66C prime95 load). I am the Official Core 2 Overheater for a reason :kaola: 
May 4, 2008 5:30:46 AM

lol thats some nice info there.ever wanna try putting 1.7v through it?haha
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 5:38:14 AM

No point, it would shutdown loading windows.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 5:40:38 AM

Sorry, I lied, I didn't need 1.5V to do that. Must have been 1.4V or there abouts.



Coretemp reported different temps for core 0 compared to RMclock
May 4, 2008 5:43:21 AM

hum...nice toaster!!!haha

but isnt the Q6600 have higher limit?but im thinking as well since the Q6600 just 2 core2 put together.so the core inside would be 85C as well isnt it?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 5:46:03 AM

Different stepping, mine is a B2 E6600, he (most likely) has a G0 Q6600. His TJMax is believed to be 100C, but I'm not sure how many people have actually tested it to check.
May 4, 2008 5:48:08 AM

i will love to test it out myself IF someone give me his Q6600 and i take no responsibility.

but i guess its "SAFE" because you cant really fry it like in the old days!lol
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 5:50:08 AM

My E6600 ran for a week (about 8-10 hours each day, since my PC isn't on 24/7) at ~74C coz I ran F@H SMP for a while at 3GHz. That isn't a long time really, but it shows that you won't blow your chip if it runs a little warm, and I'm much closer to the maximum at 74C than he is at 68C.

EDIT: Typo
May 4, 2008 5:54:31 AM

the E2160 i oc now max at 67C at 3ghz.do you think its normal?with 1.5v in bios and 1.44 underload.its fitted with a Scythe Mugan.

i think its kinda warm with such good cooler.high VID like your 1.325Vdo we have the same chip?haha
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 6:00:29 AM

67C at 1.5V is fine, mine does 66C at 1.325V :lol:  Perhaps you need some better airflow? You could also try the old HS reseating to see if that helps.
May 4, 2008 6:23:01 AM

i think i have enough air flow in my case.3x80mm,120mm,120mm in PSU and 120mm on heatsink.i just tried lower the vcore to 1.492xxV and 375x8.now load only gets 63C and core 60C.but need to prime it for 12hours before calling it stable.

and now it has passed 1:30hours already.you think i should prime it for 24hours instead?i do that in the past.but feeling lazy!lol
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 6:29:34 AM

If it passes 2 hours I call it stable "enough" :D 
May 4, 2008 6:32:18 AM

lol i prefer 12hours to be total stable.and when i finish overclock my CPU and ram i will prime it again for 24hours each.

how do you go stress your oc graphics card?i run RTHDRIBL for 24hours with all setting on max.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 4, 2008 7:21:56 AM

I runs ATITool atifact scan for 1 minute then I play games and see if there's a problem. I don't mess around with stress testing mate ;) 
May 4, 2008 7:46:39 AM

alright.if that works for you fine.i prefer the long way somehow for true stability.but not sure if its neccessory though.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
May 5, 2008 12:13:57 AM

Well as far as I'm concerned, if the programs I used every day aren't showing any problems, then what does it matter if prime95 fails after 6 hours of constant useless number crunching? Even at stock, the program will eventually fail.
May 6, 2008 4:07:52 PM

Quote:
I have already taken my CPU to 2C below shutdown


randomizer you are insane but you know that already ^^



Hey I just wanted to say,

when SmartFan activated and my TJ go to 66°C, Smartfan doesn't give it more steam! Seems like it is a real normal temp!
May 6, 2008 4:13:47 PM

If I were you I would not buy a new Fan...


My decision wether my q67 will get a decent aircooler will be one depending on wether it is easy to push q67 to 3,6 without much Vcore overkill. I don't like my Vcore shortening lifespan of my whole stuff.

Btw I can't edit my messages!
July 6, 2008 11:37:48 AM

I just came of Assassin's Creed with my Q6600 at 95C on all cores, could be a error with the sensor or something but it said 34C when I started my computer up again.. 68C should be safe if I was at 95C :p .. Turned my computer off pretty fast and owned the side of the case to cool the CPU down..

So your ok at 68C.. oh and I think the max temp for a Q6600 must be 100C or my computer would of shut down :na: 


-- Edit --

Hmm, MSI PC Alert 4 did something to my CPU fan :( .. after uninstalling it, my CPU was at 126C.. my fan works now and so does my computer.. so 68C is safe..
July 7, 2008 5:31:56 PM

Just finished building my PC last week and was tweaking around with the setting. I have a q6600 too and its running at 3GHZ @ 1.250V (lets see how stable this gets). One question that I have is that I am using CoreTemp to monitor my CPU temps and I have noticed that Core #0 and #1 always run hotter than the other two cores. Especially Core #1 where the difference can be +9C. Is that normal?? Here are the temps with no load:

Core #0: 38
Core #1: 39
Core #2: 32
Core #3: 35

When I run Prime95 though all four cores are at around the same temperature (50ish).

Oh and I am using a Zalman 9700 as my cooler.
July 8, 2008 11:21:05 AM

An explanation of the thermal and electrical limits of a processor.

Thermal: Read what the manufacturer says is the thermal limit for your processor. A quick google will tell you what that is.
If the limit is, for instance, 70C then you are 100% in the clear if you are below that at absolute maximum load, and are neither losing life on your chip nor stressing it beyond what it is made for. However, always keep in mind that if you plan on keeping a piece of hardware for a long time then the cooler you keep it the longer it will last.

Keeping your processor chilly may make it last longer than the manufacturer expects.

Voltage: Again, read what the manufacturer says is the maximum. if the max for a processor is 1.4 volts then if you run it at 1.4 volts or below you are 100% in the clear. However, if you want those higher clock speeds, and want to pass what the manufacturer suggests it is possible. Doing this will most likely result in a loss of life on your chip.

In the end, how far you can stress your processor should be evaluated based on the performance you want vs. how long you want it to last. The harder you push it the less time you will get.

Last, always proceed with extreme caution when going over the manufacturers limits for voltage on any piece of equipment even if you've seen a few people do it before.
July 10, 2008 1:41:17 PM

Xephyr said:
Just finished building my PC last week and was tweaking around with the setting. I have a q6600 too and its running at 3GHZ @ 1.250V (lets see how stable this gets). One question that I have is that I am using CoreTemp to monitor my CPU temps and I have noticed that Core #0 and #1 always run hotter than the other two cores. Especially Core #1 where the difference can be +9C. Is that normal?? Here are the temps with no load:

Core #0: 38
Core #1: 39
Core #2: 32
Core #3: 35

When I run Prime95 though all four cores are at around the same temperature (50ish).

Oh and I am using a Zalman 9700 as my cooler.


It seems fairly common to have a difference of +/- 5C.

Due to the layout of a Q6600 it is very likely that your cooler is making better contact in one area compared to another. This may be the case if you are seeing a 9C difference.

It sounds like the temps are fairly close when all the cores are loaded, so I might not be too concerned.

Here is a thread discussing it more.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=28&threadid=2186615
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
July 10, 2008 5:51:35 PM

Why bring this from the dead?
July 10, 2008 6:49:57 PM

Xephyr's quetion was from July 7th

Perhaps saultyevil posted in the newest thread pertaining to Q6600 temps.

At any rate... +1
!