Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

p35 + q6600 @ 3.6 ratios help

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Overclocking
Last response: in Overclocking
Share
July 9, 2008 6:08:51 AM

hey guys, my problem is achieving a stable overclock with my system: Q6600 G0 cpu with a ZALMAN 9700 cooler, an ABIT IP35 MB with 4GB corsair dominator 1066 8500 ram,MSI 8800GTS 512 OC, antec ninehundred,corsair HX 550 watt psu.

I am currently running my cpu at 3.2 due to stability issues, i had originally oc'd to 3.6 and for a short time 3.8, while i ran 3d mark 06 and acchieved 18540 3d marks it would not run prime 95 stably for long.
im happy with these 3d marks i just want it to be more stable.

basically after reading multiple forums i realise 1 of 2 things must be done and i want to know whats best, some people say to accheive these clocks to run the cpu:ram ratio at 1:1 i have been running 1:1.5 i think the other thing people seem to do is lower their multiplier as well.

basically i want to know if anyone on this forum runs a p35 chipset with a q6600 and have acchived 3.6 and if so what voltages/ratios they used

all help welcome iv been attempting to get a stable clock of 3.6 for over a month. i can provide any info needed

More about : p35 q6600 ratios

July 9, 2008 8:00:11 AM

Hehe, You wanna run the memory in sync mode with your FSB, due to the fact that your memory data travels through the FSB to get from thar to there!

So if you are using a higher divider, you really are just running your ram fast for little gain, due to the fact that you cant pack 400 Mhz worth of data through a 266 Mhz data bus. (fsb)

So raising the FSB to 400, while lowering the ram to sync mode, where each stick runs in sync with the FSB. (400 per stick pair for 800 Mhz.)

So the Multiplier adjustment is just because you get the FSB x the Multiplier for the final cpu speed. IE, at 400 FSB, its 400 x 9 for 3.6 Ghz. Change to a lower Multiplier and its 400 x 8 for 3.2 Ghz.

So to get 3.6 Ghz with a x 8 Multiplier you'd need a FSB of 450.

To do that, you'd need 900 Mhz ram or so. (450 doubled for 900.)

It's better in you have 1066 RAM to try and just run it in 4-4-4-12 while at 400 Mhz, unless you wanna get more from the board, and crank that FSB way up there for even better memory performance.

Good luck!

Do you mind running either Real Temp, or Core Temp with Speed step and EIST disabled, and listing what it says your VID is, please?

--Lupi
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
July 9, 2008 8:27:16 AM

^
+1

Yup, what he said.
Run your RAM at a 1:1 ratio and drop your timings a little.
Post your voltages, temps and your CPU's VID.
You will probably need to be pushing 1.5V-1.6V to get a 100% prime95 stable 3.6Ghz. At that point, you may need to upgrade your cooling to keep up with the excess heat.
Related resources
July 9, 2008 8:42:53 AM

HELLO AGAIN! thanks for the reply guys, im not quite sure how to turn off speed step or EIST but i ran the program anyway and its says my VID is 1.275.

ALSO i am currently runing my machine at 3.6 i turned the ratio to 1:1 and it worked. cpu voltage at 4.5 i belive tho i havnt had time to see if i can lower it, ram at 2.2 SB @ 1.6 OR 2.6 I CANT REMEMBER!, NB at 1.4, i raised my cpu VTT, is that good or bad, also could i push 3.8 or you think its unwise????

my current tems at idol are 24,22,22,27 so pretty low
July 9, 2008 8:46:56 AM

iv just been runing prime 95 and found that im not actually as stable as i thought i was, do you have any suggestions for other voltage settings? eg CPU VTT,SB,NB,CPU
July 9, 2008 9:13:50 AM

back again! i have turned off eist and fiddled with voltages and it seems to be stable, at 100% load on all 4 cores for 10 mins in prime 95 i recived no errors and core temp 0.99 reports that none of my cores has risen above 59 degrees.

they enitally rose to the high 50's and then the fan went turbo and they have stayed at 55,50,51,56.

cpu@ 1.4
ram@ 2.2
nb@1.4
sb@lowest (was the stock)
vtt@lowest(was stock)
400 x 9

any comments? 3.8 possible? im quite happy with my temps, but you guys are the pro's im just some 18 year old aussie whos been gaming since 10.....misses quake 2,serious sam and all that...lol
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
July 9, 2008 11:24:12 AM

With your VID, temps and the fact that you are stable at 3.6Ghz with only 1.4V you stand a good chance of hitting 3.8Ghz.

Bump your CPU voltage to 1.55V and your FSB to 423Mhz and give her a try. If you are 100% stable, lower your voltage one notch and retest. Once you start getting errors, raise your voltage 2 notches and call it good! If you want to get really saucy, raise your voltage a little more (something 1.6ish) and try for 445FSB. A 4Ghz Oc on a Q6600 is about as good as you can get.

You should have no problems pushing a high overclock with a P35 chipset. A decent P35 Mb can still push better overclocks than many X38/X48 Mb's.
July 9, 2008 1:22:47 PM

I would guess it depends on your cooling.

I needed 1.500 volts, loaded, for a full 8 hours Prime stable trip on a 1.2500 VID. So sure, at like 1.53 volts or so, which really isnt all that bad with water or other good cooling.

Crank it up!!

--Lupi
July 9, 2008 8:45:33 PM

SWEET, i managed to get 3.8 runing lastnight and it worked fine untill prime ran for half an hour, i was installing riva tuner and it BSOD on me, i was only at 1.49 volts on the cpu tho, so ill try 1.55 today, hopefully it will work perfectly.

my only other question remains the CPU VTT voltage and also south bridge, should i be messing with these or not realy, sorry for all the questions im just new to overclocking intel, untill recently i have been on amd for years. they where easy to overclock. not that this is hard, its just different and im not to sure on voltages for the SB and VTT, i guess an explanation on what cpu VTT is would be helpfull to, is it related to the VID?

THANKS FOR YOUR HELP GUYS! YOUR BRILLIANT
July 10, 2008 12:54:22 AM

Yeah, will take a bit of voltage. Just keep trying, and if you got a half hour, you are almost there.

VTT is the Voltage Termination point for your Processor. Your processor has the ability to terminate voltages that reach VTT. :) 

It has that ability because there is something in your processor that when your chip wants to change from a low logical state, to a high one, a "pull up" device assists in this transition by getting a pulse of voltage, and that pulls the voltage up to VTT, then to hover between VTT and the GTL reference point.

That is because while it is simple to lower voltage, and that can be instantaneous, adding voltage takes some time, so that device helps to raise from below GTL to over GTL as fast as possible.

Now if VTT wasn't in place, your processor pull up device would just pull the voltage up waaaayyyyy past VTT, because it is strong! As in, it gets pulsed with enough voltage to bring the voltage up to VTT, no matter where it was set. 2.0 Volts if there was no VTT.

So VTT is in place to allow your processor the ability to terminate voltages that try and exceed VTT.

VTT is not related to VID at all.

VID is your stock starting Voltage in the Bios. (So if its a 1.2000 VID, it can opporate with a loaded value of .95v at stock. As max VDrop and droop is .115)

South bridge voltage isn't really need all that often, so that can prolly stay on Auto.

To fully use VTT, you'd need to read up on GTL signaling, and what happens inside that chip of yours.

It's quite complex!

--Lupi

July 10, 2008 6:19:51 AM

ok i can runt 3.8 using 1.75 volts, but my tems reach 69 on 2 cores and 58 on the other 2, os that a bit high or does it scrape in

i just think its never gonna work as hard as it does runing prime so if those tems are ok it shouldnt hit them any other time
July 10, 2008 6:42:50 AM

I would not recommend that voltage! Wow, thats a lot! Maybe the higher VID chips just cant handle the speed.

Some people are even having trouble with 3.6 Ghz on these newer batches.

And man! What water setup do you have? Thats pretty damn good on the temps, if it were not for the voltage, that would be fine, due to the fact that you'd prolly not see 60c ever with that cooling unless you ran a test for it!

To much voltage, but great temps!

You just need a Lower VID chip. :( 

(Or some fine tuning, since I don't know the rest of your setup. But I am thinking that you can lower that voltage a bit, because that is waaayyyy high for even 3.8 Ghz.)

--Lupi
July 10, 2008 7:08:01 AM

sorry, 1.575, lol yeah i agree i dont even wanna go to 1.6V

at 1.575 it runs stably, but i dont have liquid cooling, its a zalman p9700 cooler, but i have a 120 mm exhaust fan directly behind it, a 200 mm exhaust fan directly above it, and a 120 mm side fan blowing on it with another 2 120 mm fans blowing in from the front of the case, max temp at 3.8 at 1.575V after 20 mins was 70, is that to high????? after that i was unsure so im back to 3.7, its perfectly stable at 4.9v

i read some place else that above 70 is geting a bit high but nothing other than prime gets it that high so its not to much of a drama, what should be the max full load temp im looking for??
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
July 10, 2008 7:13:48 AM

someguy69 said:
ok i can runt 3.8 using 1.75 volts


:ouch: 
Wow
That is a lot of voltage!
I would not recomend running it over 1.6V unless you have some serious cooling and your flat has A/C. No way those are your load temps with a Zalmin cooler at those voltages, something has to be reading your temps off! If you are still stable at 3.6Ghz with 1.4V (or even 1.5V) I would recomend keeping it there.
July 10, 2008 7:17:28 AM

yeah i ment 1.575 not 1.75 did you miss my last post?
a b U Graphics card
a b K Overclocking
July 10, 2008 7:23:54 AM

someguy69 said:
yeah i ment 1.575 not 1.75 did you miss my last post?


Yeah, sometimes the pages don't update for me as fast as they should :( 

With 1.575V you should be al right. You are prety lucky. I have not been able to go over my 3.6Ghz, 1.55V overclock while pushing a little more voltage. Your temps are getting a little warm but not serious yet. As you are stable with much better voltage and temps at 3.6Ghz, I would recomend you run it there. 200Mhz is not going to make that much of a diffrence in the long run.
July 10, 2008 7:34:38 AM

Flame on! No big deal. Those high VID chips start taking their toll in voltage when going for over 3.6 Ghz, and the 1.3000 and higher had trouble with 3.6!

So you look good.

--Lupi
July 10, 2008 7:36:09 AM

You can use the newest HWMoniror to record highs. So I recommend you just re set HWMonitor, and then take the comp through a good gaming run, and some encoding junk, then look at HWMonitor and see how high your temps get real world with what you normally do on it.

--Lupi
July 10, 2008 7:40:22 AM

thanks guys, iv backed down from 3.8 ghz, while it was faster it was to hot and noisy, i am happy at 3.7 at 1.49V its not much slower but way cooler and quieter,max temp at load is only 66, if i decide to water cool later on ill surely push 3.8 with this rig, it booted at 4ghz and started to run prime but i stoped it after 10 mins reaching 75 degrees

quite a success id say, iv gone from a stock benchmark of 13000 to 17800,
July 10, 2008 7:56:44 AM

:) 

Enjoy!
July 10, 2008 9:32:11 AM

lol, im back at 3.8, i cant live in the slow lane, its stable at .575 volts

wooohoooo
July 10, 2008 9:44:50 AM

Boy, that sure was quick!!

:pt1cable: 

Lupi :kaola: 
July 10, 2008 9:54:18 PM

yah, i just sped up my case fans a little, the extra 100 mhz gives almost 1000 3dmarks.

it also sounds far more impressive, i dont know of anyone else runing 3.8 on air.
July 10, 2008 10:25:16 PM

::Scoffs!!::





Hehehe, there is my 3.8 Ghz on air! And you can tell, too! :) 





3.95 Ghz for 40 bucks more!!!

--Lupi
July 11, 2008 7:22:15 AM

what voltage for the q6600 at 3.8? just curious,
July 11, 2008 8:26:34 AM

It's a 1.2500 VID, so 1.5000 loaded.

The other needed 1.53 for 3.95

Both over 8 hours stable. ;) 

--Lupi
!