Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Hyper threading

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
February 7, 2012 8:34:06 PM

Hey everybody.

I've been looking around online about overclocking 2600k and hyper threading for a while now and cant seem to decide what I wanna do.

1. would it better overall to just turn it off for 4.5ghz overclock cause when using intel burn test it peaks at 83 c for a second and stays under 70c consistently throughout. It also stays stable and requires less voltage than with hyper threading on.

OR

2. keep hyper threading on with a 4.4 or 4.3ghz overclock because of heat and voltages with 4.5ghz and hyper threading on. I'd like to stay around where I was at for stress testing with peak temps under 85c and generally when I don't have hyper threading on and play battlefield 3 and use itunes it stays around 55c but with hyper threading it goes over 60.

I just wanna know is hyper threading worth keeping on with the added heat and voltage compared to with it off. I just feel like I'm wasting that extra 100 bucks for a 2600k if I don't have it on.

Thanks!

More about : hyper threading

February 8, 2012 1:59:01 AM

thought I'd mention this...

just now I redid my thermal paste cause I thought I might have done it wrong and I just did a intel burn test and the results surprised me.
Instead of generally staying in the mid 60's and peaking at 83 it's now peaking at 62c and generally between 48-52c during the test.

So now I'm gonna see what this thing can do and I'm at 4.4ghz. I think I'm gonna go for 4.7 with HT off.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
February 8, 2012 2:07:32 AM

HT is good for video rendereing and Photoshop apps, for gaming it usually just gets in the way.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
February 8, 2012 2:17:07 AM

Well, if all you do is games and itunes then you did waste 100 because games and itunes do not take advantage of hyperthreading. You will get a minor boost as windows will move it's processes to the HT cores, freeing a little room for games, but it is a very minimal improvement. The i7's are for productivity work only. So disable HT and OC the hell out of it!
m
0
l
February 8, 2012 2:42:11 AM

well I just got to 4.7ghz and didn't go above 63c and that was peak I was 58-59c consistently and I don't need to have pll overvoltage on albeit all at 1.4v which may seem high but 1.385 wasn't stable and 1.4 is. I don't know if it's just me but I think I found my sweet spot. I'm very happy with my temps for what clock speed and volts I have it at.
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 228 à CPUs
a c 105 K Overclocking
February 8, 2012 3:19:47 AM

You should be able to hit 4.5Ghz with Hyperthreading on at around 1.3-1.35v. I would not go over 1.36 myself as thats about where you start seeing Sandy Bridge chips degrade due to electromigration. There is no reason to go over 4.5Ghz for anything unless you are running 3 x GTX 580s. You really do not want to get near 1.4v unless you have a custom watercooling setup.

You obviously did not do the thermal paste right the first time or did not have the cooler seated correctly.
Share
a c 87 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
February 8, 2012 5:46:56 AM

It's said, but if you only do gaming you pretty much wasted that $100. It should have gone to the GPU. The 2500K and a good GPU is "best" for gaming.
m
0
l
February 10, 2012 7:51:02 AM

Best answer selected by waliber.
m
0
l
!