Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Overclocking a Q6600

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
November 9, 2008 8:19:52 PM

I have a Q6600 4 GB ram and 2x8800 gts 512 and was wondering if i overclock from 2.4 Ghz to 3.2 Ghz how much of a performance boost would i get fps wise if possible as an estimation.

More about : overclocking q6600

November 9, 2008 8:40:27 PM

It's going to depend on the game. If your vid cards are the bottleneck for the game (crysis?) then you won't see as substantial of an increase as if your cpu is bottlenecking you.

That is a 33% overclock though so if your cpu is limiting you you should see quite a nice increase. Sorry for not having any hard numbers but you weren't specific enough.
November 9, 2008 8:53:28 PM

I got mine clocked at 3.2 ghz with 1 8800 gs with 4 gig of ddr2 800 running with my memory running 1:1 with a fsb running at 1600 on a Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3L motherboard running Vista Ultimate 64 bit and on 3dMard 05 I got 17334. Of course different benches and system setups are going to be different.

http://service.futuremark.com/resultAnalyzer.action?res...
Related resources
November 9, 2008 9:08:09 PM

i dont think my graphics could be the bottle neck not with the sli anyone haveasimilar setup?
November 9, 2008 11:03:37 PM

it depends completely on your system and the games you play. If you want to know how much performance gains you will get go ahead and overclock it to 3.2 and then play your desired games again and look for the differences. From there you can decide to keep the overclock or put it back to stock
November 10, 2008 12:39:32 AM

just overclocked mine to 3.2. IT has been at 2.8 for 2 months and i have to say wow. windows vista 32bit has become so much more responsive and crysis well frame rates have averaged up by 5- 10 frames more . So this guy is amazed, I didnt think id get such a noticable improvement.

multiplier to 9 bus at 356 vcore at 1.42 or in CPUZ software 1.36, ram is 1150

By the way im on exactly the same gigabyte board and i love it.(yep im a gigabyte fan boy again)
Im using a 4850 running at 51-53c normal and 82-84c full load. (Gcube should be told of) the card ran as hot as 107c, no need for that, just remove cooler use artiv 5 paste.

THANKS to toms hardware forums and the people in it who helped loads for my first overclock
November 10, 2008 12:48:34 PM

To get my overclock, on this motherboard you can set the multiplier. So I set mine for 8. My voltage is set for 1.35v. Mem set for 2v and it's been stable since I have gotten the board back in September.
November 10, 2008 6:18:27 PM

For 3.2 ghz oc, I found that 400x8 is much more stable than 356x9. Never BSOD on 400x8 but when I tried 356x9, it would BSOD after 10-30 min of any game I played.
November 10, 2008 6:21:44 PM

^ it depends via setup, however you should always make sure your system is prime95 stable. If it was crashing during games then it sounds like you didn't test it with prime95, which means that your 400x8 could be unstable as well
November 11, 2008 10:18:12 PM

Yeah always prime95 for 24 hours, I had my Q6600 @3.2 fail at 19 hours, bumped up the vcore one more notch and hit 24 hours easy, it's really important that you hit that 24 hour mark IMO.
November 11, 2008 10:36:33 PM

12 hours stable is good enough imo.
@ kyeana i prime95 for 12 hours stable. I dled the game w/ a torrent n some of the files got corrupted. please don't make assumptions.
November 11, 2008 11:05:53 PM

aeiouandxyz said:
12 hours stable is good enough imo.
@ kyeana i prime95 for 12 hours stable. I dled the game w/ a torrent n some of the files got corrupted. please don't make assumptions.


aeiouandxyz said:
For 3.2 ghz oc, I found that 400x8 is much more stable than 356x9. Never BSOD on 400x8 but when I tried 356x9, it would BSOD after 10-30 min of any game I played.



Um....No? You just said that it was the overclock that was causing your games to crash, and then you say that it was corrupted game files that caused the game to crash.... Either the overclock was unstable and the games would BSOD (which makes my previous post valid), or your game files got corrupted rendering your entire post about the "stabler overclock" useless. :non: 



Edited for clarity
November 12, 2008 5:21:27 PM

kyeana said:
Um....No? You just said that it was the overclock that was causing your games to crash, and then you say that it was corrupted game files that caused the game to crash.... Either the overclock was unstable and the games would BSOD (which makes my previous post valid), or your game files got corrupted rendering your entire post about the "stabler overclock" useless. :non: 



Edited for clarity


Do you know what I did? Cuz if you did, it would give you the right to say this. However, circumstances dictate that you didn't. I set everything to stock and the game still crashed. So I downloaded another Crysis ISO and reinstalled. Everything worked at stock and OC settings. Can you deduce what the problem is now?
November 12, 2008 5:34:26 PM

aeiouandxyz said:
Do you know what I did? Cuz if you did, it would give you the right to say this. However, circumstances dictate that you didn't. I set everything to stock and the game still crashed. So I downloaded another Crysis ISO and reinstalled. Everything worked at stock and OC settings. Can you deduce what the problem is now?


Quote:
For 3.2 ghz oc, I found that 400x8 is much more stable than 356x9. Never BSOD on 400x8 but when I tried 356x9, it would BSOD after 10-30 min of any game I played.


If it was the game files that were causing the problems then why the post about the 400x8 being stable and 356x9 being unstable and causing games to crash when that wasn't the problem? :heink: 
November 17, 2008 3:11:23 AM

+1 to tat
!