Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

C2D readily hits 80C

Tags:
  • Heatsinks
  • Heat
  • CPUs
  • Overclocking
Last response: in Overclocking
Share
August 6, 2009 6:11:59 PM

CPU: C2D E8400 3.0GHz
M/B: Gigabyte EP45C-UD3R
Cooler: Stock

CPU slightly overclocked to 3.2GHz and 400MHz FSB

After less than two minutes of running Prime 95 my core temps hit 80C. This seems too high to me. I made absolutely double sure that the heat sink was seated properly on installation. I've got lot's of openings in my case but the P/S fan runs pretty slow and I only have one auxilary fan. My dual Seagate 1TB drives seem to get pretty darn hot too. However, the CPU temp rises sharply and declines sharply so I think it's more an issue with getting the temps from the CPU into the heat sink.

I'm not big on overclocking. Just trying to get the most out of the system without much added cost or loss of reliability. So... Here's what I'm considering:

a. Take off heat sink, clean off stock heat transfer paste and replace with good stuff.
This would be easiest but I'm not sure it would make much difference.

b. Lap CPU and stock heat sink.
This would be hardest but I'm not sure it would do enough.

c. Get a better heat sink.
This would still be a pain because I know I would have to remove the M/B to make sure I get the fan on properly because of the idiotic fastening system. Trying to keep costs down too. But... It might be nice to cool things down and boost up to 3.6GHz. I definitely want to stay quiet and I don't want to get wet.

Advice?

P.S. Does overclocking the FSB have much effect on core temps?

More about : c2d readily hits 80c

a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 6, 2009 6:19:18 PM

F**k an "A" another one of these questions?

Do your research before you post a question like this!!

1. Yes overclocking has an effect on temps.

2. The stock cooler for C2D sucks when you overclock.

3. Buy a new cooler.

4. DO YOUR research. [:lectrocrew:6]



5. welcome to the forum :lol: 
a b à CPUs
August 6, 2009 7:02:49 PM

oh come on overshoked, you didn't even recommend him using the Sunbeam Core Contact Freezer (which i think he should use)
Related resources
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 6, 2009 7:09:49 PM

^LOL

Your right... i was going to add that but decided not to because it would have been a hell of alot of info for one post.

a b à CPUs
August 6, 2009 7:11:55 PM

i think half of your post is you tribute to OC sig
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 6, 2009 7:13:35 PM

mindless728 said:
i think half of your post is you tribute to OC sig



You say that like its a bad thing. :pt1cable: 
a b à CPUs
August 6, 2009 7:17:18 PM

no not a bad thing, just half of your long post really isn't a post, its kind of there all of the time
a b à CPUs
a c 337 K Overclocking
August 6, 2009 7:46:48 PM

Seriously, if people would just take 5 mins and do a little research before they ask questions, they might learn a little bit about PCs. What happened to figuring it out on your own?
August 6, 2009 8:00:28 PM

overshocked said:
F**k an "A" another one of these questions?
Do your research before you post a question like this!!
1. Yes overclocking has an effect on temps.
2. The stock cooler for C2D sucks when you overclock.
3. Buy a new cooler.
4. DO YOUR research. [:lectrocrew:6]
5. welcome to the forum :lol: 


Dude... Chill. ;) 

1. Duh, overclocking effects temps, but I always see it in reference to increasing the speed of the processor, not the FSB. I.E. will a setting of 333MHz FSB and a CPU multiplier of 9 differ from a 400MHz FSB and a multiplier of 7.5?

2. Duh, the stock cooler sucks. Will it be adequate to the task of a very slight overclock with some minor changes? I don't know.

3. Maybe you could just buy an attitude. No.. wait.. You already have one! Seriously, I expected that answer on a forum devoted to overclocking but I was hoping for a little balanced information based on my only slight overclocking.

4. If I did no research would I know about lapping and overclocking? The problem is that the vast majority of overclocking information is for full bore, blow-a-circuit-breaker power.

5. Thanks for the welcome. I don't mean to start a pissing match or anything. I do not take serious offense to anything you said so please don't take serious offense with any of my comments.
August 6, 2009 8:16:55 PM

overshocked said:
You say that like its a bad thing. :pt1cable: 


I got very sick, very fast of seeing that damn sig pic. FireFox + AdBlock Plus took care of that. Right click the pic, select block, and never see it again!
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 6, 2009 8:47:13 PM

orangegator said:
FireFox + AdBlock Plus took care of that. Right click the pic, select block, and never see it again!



Interesting... HMMMMM.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 6, 2009 8:48:32 PM

mister jj said:
Dude... Chill. ;) 

1. Duh, overclocking effects temps, but I always see it in reference to increasing the speed of the processor, not the FSB. I.E. will a setting of 333MHz FSB and a CPU multiplier of 9 differ from a 400MHz FSB and a multiplier of 7.5?

2. Duh, the stock cooler sucks. Will it be adequate to the task of a very slight overclock with some minor changes? I don't know.

3. Maybe you could just buy an attitude. No.. wait.. You already have one! Seriously, I expected that answer on a forum devoted to overclocking but I was hoping for a little balanced information based on my only slight overclocking.

4. If I did no research would I know about lapping and overclocking? The problem is that the vast majority of overclocking information is for full bore, blow-a-circuit-breaker power.

5. Thanks for the welcome. I don't mean to start a pissing match or anything. I do not take serious offense to anything you said so please don't take serious offense with any of my comments.



No dude, i wasnt mad at you. Its just you have no idea how many stubpid questions people ask here.

We get atleast 10 a week just simply saying "how do i overclock".
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 6, 2009 9:01:20 PM

mister jj said:
Dude... Chill. ;) 

1. Duh, overclocking effects temps, but I always see it in reference to increasing the speed of the processor, not the FSB. I.E. will a setting of 333MHz FSB and a CPU multiplier of 9 differ from a 400MHz FSB and a multiplier of 7.5?

2. Duh, the stock cooler sucks. Will it be adequate to the task of a very slight overclock with some minor changes? I don't know.

3. Maybe you could just buy an attitude. No.. wait.. You already have one! Seriously, I expected that answer on a forum devoted to overclocking but I was hoping for a little balanced information based on my only slight overclocking.

4. If I did no research would I know about lapping and overclocking? The problem is that the vast majority of overclocking information is for full bore, blow-a-circuit-breaker power.

5. Thanks for the welcome. I don't mean to start a pissing match or anything. I do not take serious offense to anything you said so please don't take serious offense with any of my comments.



1.) The answer is yes, it doesnt matter the speed of the FSB. It just matters the speed of the CPU, so if you lowered the multi. and raised the FSB it would have no affect on CPU temp.

2.) The stock cooler is very efficient for the job it is MADE to do.

The key word there is "made" if you overclock it will not be sufficient for the job because intel trys to get away with using the least amount of metal possible to make a heatsink that will work at the speed it was designed for.

Although i am suprised that the temperature gets that high for such a low increase in speed.

Can we have the temps at the default speed?

3.) The TDP that the stock cooler was made to handle is 65w of heat.

YOu can calculat tdp using this formula:

TDP_new = TDP * (MHz_new/MHz_stock) * (V_new/V_stock)^2
August 7, 2009 2:19:12 AM

I set the CPU to the default speed of 3.0GHz and I saw no difference at all in the temps. At idle the core temps are about 51C. Although it is a bit warm in the room today. Around 26C.

I then looked at the TDP_new formula and thought about CPU voltages. I had not really noticed before but now I discovered that CPU-Z was reporting the Core voltage at 1.312v. I thought that was higher than it should be and looked up the stock voltage, which turned out to be 1.250v.

So... I checked the BIOS and my CPU voltage had 1.250v listed under the NORMAL heading and it was set to AUTO. I guess I had incorrectly assumed that the auto setting would use what was listed as normal. I should have known better after I discovered that when I set my memory timing to AUTO they were actually better than the "normal" values listed.

Anyway.... I manually set the CPU voltage to 1.250v and now my idle temp is around 46C and I maxed out my core temps at 70C and 68C under full load for 15 minutes. Looks good to me!

One other oddity: CPU-Z is now reporting the core voltage at 1.216v at idle and 1.200v under load while Core Temp is reporting 1.100v at idle and 1.250v under load.

Thanks for all the information and help.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 7, 2009 2:39:46 AM

mister jj said:
I set the CPU to the default speed of 3.0GHz and I saw no difference at all in the temps. At idle the core temps are about 51C. Although it is a bit warm in the room today. Around 26C.

I then looked at the TDP_new formula and thought about CPU voltages. I had not really noticed before but now I discovered that CPU-Z was reporting the Core voltage at 1.312v. I thought that was higher than it should be and looked up the stock voltage, which turned out to be 1.250v.

So... I checked the BIOS and my CPU voltage had 1.250v listed under the NORMAL heading and it was set to AUTO. I guess I had incorrectly assumed that the auto setting would use what was listed as normal. I should have known better after I discovered that when I set my memory timing to AUTO they were actually better than the "normal" values listed.

Anyway.... I manually set the CPU voltage to 1.250v and now my idle temp is around 46C and I maxed out my core temps at 70C and 68C under full load for 15 minutes. Looks good to me!

One other oddity: CPU-Z is now reporting the core voltage at 1.216v at idle and 1.200v under load while Core Temp is reporting 1.100v at idle and 1.250v under load.

Thanks for all the information and help.



There you go (= figured it our by yourself.
!