Ad
News

Alienware announces desktop PC with Intel's latest quad-core processor

Published on January 11, 2007

Alienware said it "will" launch Intel's second quad-core desktop processor, the 2.4 GHz Core 2 Quad Q6600, on its Area-51 7500 desktop system. Read more

CES 2007: Intel rolls out new quad-core processor Core 2 Quad Q6600

Published on January 08, 2007

Intel is enjoying its lead in the current microprocessor market and today announced more CPUs with four cores. There are three new quad-cores altogether, one desktop processor and two chips for entry-level servers. Read more

Intel dual-core embedded platform to extend applications for industrial PCs

Published on February 16, 2006

The availability of Intel's Core Duo dual-core x86 embedded platform will help expand industrial PC (IPC) applications and improve related technologies to the point where they can compete with current PC performance, according to Taiwan-based IPC specialists. Read more

Intel Adds 3 New Value CPUs

Published on September 02, 2008

Intel has updated its pricing sheet for processors Monday and although prices have not changed, three new value processors have been added Read more

Latest Reviews & Articles

System Builder Marathon: Performance & Value

Published on November 28, 2008

We tightened the budget on this month’s enthusiast-level system while loosening our belt for the low-cost gamer box by a similar percentage. Today we gauge the effect of these changes on performance and value and compare to last month's machines. Read more

System Builder Marathon: $1,250 Enthusiast PC

Published on November 27, 2008

On this, the second day of our System Builder Marathon, Don turns down the price tag of his mid-range build looking for a sweet spot just above the $1,000 marker. Let's see what sort of hardware he found for it! Read more

System Builder Marathon: $625 Gaming PC

Published on November 26, 2008

This month's System Builder Marathon is all about your feedback to us. We've revamped our entry-level and mid-range PCs with new price points. Let's kick things off with what we think is the best value at a $625 price point! Read more

The State Of The Personal Computer

Published on November 25, 2008

Where were we in 2008 and where are we heading in 2009? In his State of the Personal Computer address, Alan Dang shares his insights as a user of three different platforms: Mac, Windows, and Linux. Read more

  Tom's Hardware Forums » Overclocking » CPUs » Q6600 4th core keeps failing in Prime95: need help
 

Q6600 4th core keeps failing in Prime95: need help




Word :   Username :  
 
Bottom
Author
 Thread : Q6600 4th core keeps failing in Prime95: need help
 
Profile: stranger
More Information

My rig:

Asus Maximus Formula X38 Mobo
Q6600 currently trying to OC at 3.4Ghz
TRUE with Scythe Fan SFF21F

http://i522.photobucket.com/albums/w349/Hoang1557/OCList.jpg

I set everything at it's lowest possible setting, except the NB voltage (1.41V)

I'm adjusting the cpu vcore as you can see, and a funny pattern is coming out of it. The fourth core (Core #3) keeps failing on me. Any clues as to why this is happening and what I can do to make it stable at 3.4ghz? BTW, the VID is 1.3250 (sad I know) so is it just possible that I'll just need a really high vcore (>1.5?) I can get 3.3ghz (9*366) stable with about 1.416V vcore in windows. Suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks.

Related Product

Register or log in to remove.

Profile: journeyman
More Information

what is the rest of your bios set at? multiplier, FSB stuff? did disable all the extra stuff ei...spread spectrum ect.....

Profile: addict
More Information

First, try an 8X multiplier, the higher fsb and lower core frequently adds a bit more clocking headroom to the CPU.

Secondly the CPU has probably reached its limit. The slew rate of the weakest core can't be decreased by upping the voltage, since that just increases the saturation region.
http://powerelectronics.com/power_ [...] fficiency/

My own G0 Q6600 maxes out at 3.29 Ghz with two cores failing Prime95 above that. The voltage before vdroop is 1.4125. after vdroop on the Maximus Formula that's 1.36-something. Increasing beyond that gets a lot more heat but almost no increase in speed.

Assuming all the CPU "features" have been disabled, including any memory speed boosters, try 3.33 Ghz. If that's stable, be happy.

Profile: stranger
More Information

Yep, spectrums disabled, c1e and all that is disabled. loadline calibration enabled to reduce vdroop effect.

@prow, the graph shows 9*378 at the top (or 3.4Ghz).

I will try lowering the multiplier. I read in another article that bad ram could also be another factor? at 425FSB, you think the value I'm at right now (1.41 bios, a little higher in windows) would be a good starting value? Oops, I forgot to include the FSB termination voltage. That's also at the lowest setting possible. Should I up that too for stability?

Profile: addict
More Information

We don't know what your ram is, but certainly the memory can limit the OC. Run it at 1:1 at rated voltage. Up the fsb one notch as I did, but I don't think it made a difference.

Profile: stranger
More Information

Ram is ocz HPC Reaper 2X2GB. Running Vista 64 ultimate. Specs are 4-4-4-15 at 2.1 Volts. It is currently at 1:1. I manually set these timings myself. An auto, the timings are 5-5-5-15 I believe. I tried lowering the multiplier down to 8. It still doesn't seem to be running stable.

I upped the NB for the higher FSB, and also upped the VTT to about 1.45V. CPU vcore went up to about the same level. I get the strange message of hardware failure and that I need to reinstall windows. I forget what low voltage is making that happen. I think have a low NB voltage will give that message? I upped that until I could get log into windows. About 1.45 NB voltage in bios.

It keeps crashing within the first ten minutes of prime95. fourth core seems to fail sometimes too. I thought the 8x multiplier allowed more headroom for cpu? I guess it didn't work.

Right now I'm trying to get 9X370 (3.33 GHz) and it seems to be doing better. I'm still crashing, but I probably just need to add some more volts. 4th core alone doesn't seem to be affected with this small boost.


Message edited by ApocNarok on 08-19-2008 at 10:07:56 PM
You tell me what I do.
Profile: Eternal Poster
More Information

or you have a what called "bum core" i guess you can guess what it means from the name.

tough luck!

Profile: stranger
More Information

=P hehe I think I've come to realize that. Regardless, I'm happy with this OC, considering it's my first one.

You tell me what I do.
Profile: Eternal Poster
More Information

i OCed a Q6600 to 3.4Ghz once and stuck there.not even max NB/FSB voltage and 1.6vcore can solve the problem.

luckiy that pc isnt mine!lol:P

Profile: nimble knuckle

probably an RMA

You tell me what I do.
Profile: Eternal Poster
More Information

RMA wouldnt accept it as the CPU works at stock which is what it was intended to run on.

Profile: journeyman
More Information

i have p5q pro board and a Q6600, i got it stable at 3.6GHz, but did not like the vcore which was 1.55. at 3.4GHz same as yours with a 9*378. i had to set my NB 1.40 to get it stable, vcore 1.44. all other voltages set at auto. try to change your ram settings to 5-5-5-18, that ram setting was the key for mine. i also had issue with the ram set 5-5-5-15. give the 5-5-5-18 a try and see what happens.

Profile: stranger
More Information

Thx, I'll give it a shot.

Profile: journeyman
More Information

O hey do you have the 45nm or 65nm Q6600? i have the 65nm. are you running core temp or anything else? what are your temps hitting?

Profile: stranger
More Information

65nm G0. Let's see, at max load at the highest voltage I was testing, they were 66,66,62,62. I was able to find a pretty stable vcore of 1.424 in windows for a 3.33GHz OC. I'm still testing for stability, but so far I haven't had to up any other voltages (VCC, NB, PLL, etc) which is okay for me. I made the mistake of leaving those settings on auto. luckily I didn't keep it that way too long. Lesson learned for my first overclocking attempt, but I'll probably still keep this rig even when Nehalem arrives.

You tell me what I do.
Profile: Eternal Poster
More Information

the Q6600 is ONLY produce in 65nm.prow

@OP those temp seems fine. but i would recommend you to do 8x multiplier so you can get a higher system bandwidth like i did when i realise i got a bum core and cant get a high enough OC at the FSB.

Profile: stranger
More Information

@iluvgillgill:

Okay, I'll try that. Turns out I need 1.432V CPU Vcore in windows to get it pretty much stable. I've been running prime for about 30 minutes and it looks good so far... I'll plan to run OCCT after prime95.

I'm currently at 9*370. If I switch to 8*416, what other settings will I need to adjust? Is it just the