Brief Newb OCing Question

[bilboe]

Hi everyone!
I have built several computers, but this is my first overclock.

I have a 3.0 ghz e8400, (333 x 9 multiplier), with stock cooler, running on a Gigabyte EP45-UD3P, with a 2gb stick of 1066 ram.

Yesterday I upped the speed to 355, and lowered the RAM multiplier to 3, giving me a stable (several hours on Prime95) overclock. The highest temp that RealTemp reported during this was 55 C.

Is this high load temp of 55 C bad for my processor?

If not, do you think I could reach 3.6ghz (400x9) on my stock cooler? Do you think I would need to up the voltage? Would these temps be bad for my processor?

Thanks!

Bilbo

 

[cjl]

55C is fine. In fact, anything under about 70C is fine.

 

[bilboe]

70C won't diminish the life of the CPU?

Also, does that mean I can go ahead with the 3.6, and do I need to increase vcore, or should i leave it at auto?

 

[irkjab]

You can leave the vcore alone at first, then gradually increase it when the oc starts being unstable.
My q6600 runs at 3.0ghz with the stock voltage settings (unfortunately i can't get it cooled well). I'd stay well below 70c to be safe, but keep in mind that your processor will rarely be put under the type of strain that prime95 gives it.
Also, 55c load temps probably aren't that much higher than what you get at stock speeds.

 

[Cache]

70C won't diminish the life of the CPU?

Also, does that mean I can go ahead with the 3.6, and do I need to increase vcore, or should i leave it at auto?

Never use auto for anything--the board will always feed more volts than necessary, and that translates to lower heat, and potentially lower lifespan of your chip since you have no idea what it's running. 55c is fine, though, and cjl is right that as long as you're cooling below 70c you're just fine. I wouldn't run it that high all the time personally--I like some wiggle room--but it is safe.

See what your voltage settings are, and bump up a little, then see if it's stable. If not, add a bit more voltage manually. Just... never depend on auto. It's fast and works for quick checks, but it will always dump more electricity into the chip than it will ever need.

 

[bilboe]

Never use auto for anything--the board will always feed more volts than necessary, and that translates to lower heat, and potentially lower lifespan of your chip since you have no idea what it's running. 55c is fine, though, and cjl is right that as long as you're cooling below 70c you're just fine. I wouldn't run it that high all the time personally--I like some wiggle room--but it is safe.

See what your voltage settings are, and bump up a little, then see if it's stable. If not, add a bit more voltage manually. Just... never depend on auto. It's fast and works for quick checks, but it will always dump more electricity into the chip than it will ever need.

Is 70 C ok for the core temps, or the cpu case temp?

How would I see my voltage if its on auto? Could I start on auto, and then lower as necessary?

Also, I will be lowering my RAM multiplier to 2.66, but Gigabyte has a 2.66 A and a 2.66 C, is there a difference?

 

[Cache]

Is 70 C ok for the core temps, or the cpu case temp? How would I see my voltage if its on auto? Could I start on auto, and then lower as necessary?

Core temps. I'm not familiar with Gigabyte's bios, but a lot of times you need to manually enter the voltage. You know what CPU-Z is telling you, so start there and check for stability. As far as RAM multipliers of 2.66A or C? You've got me there--I have no idea.

 

[bilboe]

Ok, I kicked the speed up to 3.6, voltage down to normal (off auto), selected 2.66D as ram multiplier.

Im running Prime95, with realtemp in the background, core temperatures peaking at 56 C so far.

By the way, I noticed that core 0 is always like 15 seconds behind core 1, and is a little cooler. Is this bad?

How long should I let Prime95 run before i know its stable?

Thank you so much!

 

[Cache]

Ok, I kicked the speed up to 3.6, voltage down to normal (off auto), selected 2.66D as ram multiplier.

Im running Prime95, with realtemp in the background, core temperatures peaking at 56 C so far.

By the way, I noticed that core 0 is always like 15 seconds behind core 1, and is a little cooler. Is this bad?

How long should I let Prime95 run before i know its stable?

Thank you so much!

Yeah, there is always going to be one--even two--cores that operate at higher temps than the others. That's totally normal and you shouldn't worry about it. Your temps are good, and as far as running Prime95, that depends entirely on you. Generally speaking, if you let it run overnight and nothing has a problem--you're OC can be considered secure. Some people run it for only two hours, others insist 24.... eh, it's a matter of opinion. Personally, I think if it runs fine for 8 hours stressing the hell out of the cores, you're good. Just don't think because it's stable for 5 minutes that you're okay. It will need to take time, and take a beating from Prime95 before it's really considered truly stable.

Then the fun begins. Play with it--if 3.6 is your ultimate goal is maintaining that, see how low you can drop the voltage. Or, see how high you can go before the chip just can't give anymore. As always--monitor temps, keep your voltages as low as possible.

 

[RJR]

Ok, I kicked the speed up to 3.6, voltage down to normal (off auto), selected 2.66D as ram multiplier.

Im running Prime95, with realtemp in the background, core temperatures peaking at 56 C so far.

Here is the Intel spec sheet for your processor (i'm presuming you have an E0).

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB9J

You can download Coretemp and it will tell you the VID of the chip so you can get some idea of a starting point for your vcore voltage. Also make sure Realtemp (or Coretemp) is set to 100 Tjmax so the temp reading is accurate.

Also the a,b,c,d after the memory multiplier is your memory strap. D=400, B=333.....D is a little looser than B, but you will never notice a difference so whatever one gives you the memory speed you need and is stable is fine.

 

[bilboe]

I just set the Tjmax to 100 (from 95), and my readings jumped to 64 C, is this bad?

Also, now core 0 is 2 tests ahead of core 1 in Prime95, is this bad too?

Thank you!

 

[Cache]

I just set the Tjmax to 100 (from 95), and my readings jumped to 64 C, is this bad?

Also, now core 0 is 2 tests ahead of core 1 in Prime95, is this bad too?

Thank you!

Totally safe. Windows is always changing the 'weight' of the cores based on user activity, and so one core will inevitably fall behind. I had one about 2 hours behind the others one time--again, totally normal.

 

[Cache]

I just set the Tjmax to 100 (from 95), and my readings jumped to 64 C, is this bad?

Also, now core 0 is 2 tests ahead of core 1 in Prime95, is this bad too?

Thank you!

Oh, and as far as the thermals go... RJR gave you an excellent source for checking on what is too hot for your processor. Also remember during Prime95 you are really pushing that CPU and 99.99999% of the time it will never work that hard. You can calibrate RealTemp to better accuracy, this page will show you how.

 

[bilboe]

Ok great. Now I just have one last question.

As for the vcore, last night when I was running Prime95, CPU-Z showed it at 1.184 (I had set it at 1.25 in the BIOS, and this is what it said the "vid" was. Is this different than the vcore?). Is this 1.184 as high as it will go? Should I lower the vcore to 1.185, 1.19, or 1.2, or something else?

Thank you very very much!


-Bilboe

PS. In Prime95, I am supposed to select "Round Off Checking" in the menu, right?

 

[Cache]

Ok great. Now I just have one last question.

As for the vcore, last night when I was running Prime95, CPU-Z showed it at 1.184 (I had set it at 1.25 in the BIOS, and this is what it said the "vid" was. Is this different than the vcore?). Is this 1.184 as high as it will go? Should I lower the vcore to 1.185, 1.19, or 1.2, or something else?

Thank you very very much!


-Bilboe

PS. In Prime95, I am supposed to select "Round Off Checking" in the menu, right?

If I remember correctly... VID is the initial startup energy, VCore is the energy needed to run the system. If I remember correctly.

And yes, you select round off checking on Prime95.

 

[bilboe]

Does that mean I should leave the voltage where it is? I thought the VID was what you set it to and the vcore was how much it was actually using.

Thanks,

Bilbo

 

[Cache]

Does that mean I should leave the voltage where it is? I thought the VID was what you set it to and the vcore was how much it was actually using.

Thanks,

Bilbo

You may be right--I'm at work and right now depending on my (highly) unreliable memory skills. ;p

 

[RJR]

Ok great. Now I just have one last question.

As for the vcore, last night when I was running Prime95, CPU-Z showed it at 1.184 (I had set it at 1.25 in the BIOS, and this is what it said the "vid" was. Is this different than the vcore?). Is this 1.184 as high as it will go? Should I lower the vcore to 1.185, 1.19, or 1.2, or something else?

The VID is set by Intel when they manufacture the cpu. You can google it and find different explanations, some say it's the maximum voltage for that chip, some say it's the default voltage for that chip. I just use it as a starting point to manually set the vcore when starting to OC and work from there. The one thing Intel does state is the maximum recommended voltage (1.3625v) for your processor. Just keep it under the max and your fine. Here is a good read for voltages.

http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=126

A vcore setting too high will produce too much heat and too low will be unstable. You just have to determine what voltage your setup wants/needs to be stable. You can lower your vcore until it becomes unstable and then raise the vcore a few notches and retest to obtain your lowest vcore setting. I've had mine set at 1.224v @ 4.05 Ghz but wouldn't pass 24 hours of Prime95 at that setting, so I'm at 1.26v now and have no problems at all. It's all a trial and error thing and testing and monitoring temps.

Oh yeh, as stated by cjl, just keep your temps under 70c. An aftermarket heat sink would really help here. Just for a comparison, I'm at 53c max @ 4.05 Ghz @ 1.26v vcore with an older Ninja+ cooler. You can take the heat debate (and any worries) out of the equation with a good aftermarket heat sink.

Have fun.

 

[bilboe]

So then that leaves me with one last question.

What heatsink would you guys recommend for under $50?

I was taking a look at the Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro, but I have read that it doesn't fit the UD3P. Is this true?


Thank you so much for all your help!

 

[Cache]

So then that leaves me with one last question.

What heatsink would you guys recommend for under $50?

I was taking a look at the Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro, but I have read that it doesn't fit the UD3P. Is this true?


Thank you so much for all your help!

What kind of clearance do you have in your case? That's really the major limiting factor. Personally I rather adore the Xigmatek Dark Knight, but I love that metallic color. $45 US.

 

[bilboe]

What kind of clearance do you have in your case? That's really the major limiting factor. Personally I rather adore the Xigmatek Dark Knight, but I love that metallic color. $45 US.

I have a Cooler Master CM690, with like 6.5 inch clearance.

 

[Cache]

Oh yeah, plenty of room for a nice heatsink then. I know I like the Dark Knight, but there are similar coolers built much the same.

 

[bilboe]

Thanks!

So, I lowered the vcore down to 1.2, and my temps dropped 8 C, and are hanging out around 58 C on prime 95. Idle, they are about 32 C.
Would you say I really need a new HSF if these are the temps?

For some reason, now that I lowered my voltage, Prime95 seems to be running slower (at the same 3.6ghz) is this possible, or is it just me?

Also, CPU-Z keeps showing the core voltage switching from 1.184 and 2, is this bad?

Second-to-Lastly, I set my Mushkin RAM (rated for 2-2.1volts) manually to 2 volts, but my BIOS is showing that its right below 2 (at like 1.95) however, it passed memtest just fine. Is this bad?

Finally, I changed the memory multiplier from 2.66D to 2.66C, except then MemTest showed my RAM as ddr2 1000-mhz not the 1066 that it is. When I switched back to D, it went back to 1066. Any ideas about this?

Thank you very much for all of your wonderful help!

 

[irkjab]

58c seems fine to me as far as load temps go

Lower voltage won't have any effect on the processor speed

Its normal for the voltage to fluctuate a little. I assume you mean fluctuating between 1.184 and 1.2v? Between 1.184 and 2.0v would be a little odd.

If your ram passed memtest at that voltage, its just fine. My motherboard was running my ram at 1.8v even though its rated at 1.9v, and it still ran perfectly. 2v vs 1.95v isn't a huge difference.

I've no clue about the memory multiplier.

 

[bilboe]

58c seems fine to me as far as load temps go

Lower voltage won't have any effect on the processor speed

Its normal for the voltage to fluctuate a little. I assume you mean fluctuating between 1.184 and 1.2v? Between 1.184 and 2.0v would be a little odd.

If your ram passed memtest at that voltage, its just fine. My motherboard was running my ram at 1.8v even though its rated at 1.9v, and it still ran perfectly. 2v vs 1.95v isn't a huge difference.

I've no clue about the memory multiplier.

Yeah, I meant 1.2

Thank you very much!

P.S. Would you say I could go any lower with the voltage, or leave it be?