FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

q6600 overclock, ram ratio question

Post Date: 2008-01-20
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Mythius101 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 134 		  Quote Mythius101 Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Topic: q6600 overclock, ram ratio question
    Posted: 20 Jan 2008 at 3:37am
I have my Q6600 running at a multiplier of 9x, and 333 MHz bus speed for a clock of about 3GHz.

I got 1066 Dominator RAM with my system, and was wondering how important the 1:1 ratio is for performance, in regards to ram speed and CPU bus speed.

I can underclock my ram to 667MHz for the 1:1 ratio and tighten the timings quite a bit.  Is this better than running the ram at 1066MHz and not having a 1:1 ratio (would be 5:4)?  I plan to run some benchmarks, but I'm just wondering what people's previous experience is with this.



Current settings.


Edited by Mythius101 - 20 Jan 2008 at 3:51am
Vista Home Premium 32
Core 2 Quad Q6600
nVidia 680iA1
2GB Corsair Dominator RAM
2x SLI Dual GeForce 8800GTS 512MB
Creative Labs X-Fi Fatal1ty XtremeGamer
Back to Top
skyR View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Digital Storm Apprentice


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2220 		  Quote skyR Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 20 Jan 2008 at 11:12am
It really does not matter as you won't see any difference in performance at all.
The only thing that keeps me wishing on a wishing star.
Back to Top
Tyler Lowe View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 14 May 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote Tyler Lowe Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 20 Jan 2008 at 7:32pm
I find I get my best results just under a RAM speed of 1000 MHz. Right in that 900 to 1000 area is where I am able to set my speeds and start tightening up on the timings, starting with the old 5-5-5-15 2T standby and moving tighter from there.
 
I have also found it easier to get a stable OC with a linked FSB. In the area you're in, I would be tempted either to drop down to 1320 MHz or move up to either 1380 or 1420. If you try those three settings, I think you'll see why I'm suggesting this. To some extent it's going to depend on your BIOS, but at least with EVGA's P31, I see a jump in Vcore requirement just shy of 1333. At 1320, my OC is stable in Prime95 (run time: 1 hour) at a 1.275 Vcore and the CPU temps never go past 52C on the CPU, 34C at idle. Once I move up to 1333, the Vcore requirement jumps to 1.325, and allows me to run up to 1380 without any issue aside from max temps over 60C on the CPU, which I am not comfortable with.
 
Every chip does work differently, but check those out and see how it goes.


Edited by Tyler Lowe - 20 Jan 2008 at 7:49pm
Back to Top
Mythius101 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 134 		  Quote Mythius101 Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 20 Jan 2008 at 8:43pm
Thanks, Tyler.  I'm going to try the 1320 linked FSB.  When you say 1.275 Vcore, is that the setting you specified in the BIOS?
Vista Home Premium 32
Core 2 Quad Q6600
nVidia 680iA1
2GB Corsair Dominator RAM
2x SLI Dual GeForce 8800GTS 512MB
Creative Labs X-Fi Fatal1ty XtremeGamer
Back to Top
Mythius101 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 134 		  Quote Mythius101 Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 20 Jan 2008 at 8:43pm
Also I should note that my processor is the G0 revision.  Not sure what affect that may have.
Vista Home Premium 32
Core 2 Quad Q6600
nVidia 680iA1
2GB Corsair Dominator RAM
2x SLI Dual GeForce 8800GTS 512MB
Creative Labs X-Fi Fatal1ty XtremeGamer
Back to Top
Tyler Lowe View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 14 May 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote Tyler Lowe Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 20 Jan 2008 at 9:10pm
Yes, that's what I specified in the BIOS. You should be able to get stability with less juice on the GO. I would try hitting that clock at 1.25Vcore and see if it's stable. I don't think you could get away with much less.
 
The trick I use, is to set Vcore to "auto" and try walking the FSB up 20Mhz at a time until I see it jump from it's default value (1.24V for me). Once I see that jump, I know that clock speed represents the point where deminishing returns begin. What I mean is, from that point on, the voltage needed is going to climb at a substantially greater rate relative to speed gained.
 
I can remain stable with 1.25 Vcore until I break 1300 FSB. To move up to 1320 is a jump to 1.275V. To hit 1380 I have to run at 1.325V. My ceiling on this chip is about 1420 with a 9x multi, but in order to climb that last 40MHz, I have to increase to 1.475 Vcore.
 
With your chip, you may be able to keep the temps under control up to about 1400 MHz FSB, but at some point allong the line, you're going to hit a point where you need to but increasingly large amounts of voltage in to get smaller gains.


Edited by Tyler Lowe - 21 Jan 2008 at 1:30am
Back to Top
Mythius101 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 134 		  Quote Mythius101 Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 20 Jan 2008 at 9:12pm
I found it amusing that DS sent me the computer with the vcore set at 1.55 and OCed it to 2.8GHz.

Tyler:  When you say that you have the best results when you link the FSB, what is your cpu to mem ratio?
Vista Home Premium 32
Core 2 Quad Q6600
nVidia 680iA1
2GB Corsair Dominator RAM
2x SLI Dual GeForce 8800GTS 512MB
Creative Labs X-Fi Fatal1ty XtremeGamer
Back to Top
Tyler Lowe View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 14 May 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote Tyler Lowe Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 20 Jan 2008 at 9:24pm
I vary that setting to drop my RAM speed between 800 and 1000, trying to get as close to 950 as I can. The 680i has problems with RAM speeds over 1000, it can be a real pain in the butt to get a stable timing. Try the linked : [auto] setting which is a ratio of 4:3 ( I have no idea why they don't just have that ratio listed). My timings are iirc: 5-4-5-14 2T 4-28-6-10 7.8 us. You should be able to tighten up on that a bit since you're using PC8500.
 
One thing about the settings they ship systems with- those are settings that were stable running stress tests in a 90*F room for 24 hours straight. The settings I am suggesting will run stable on my system for an hour in Prime95. There's a vast difference between running stable at 100% load for an hour or two vs a full day. Nothing I do comes close to that kind of stress, so the settings I use work for me. DSO garantees 100% stability, hence the very high Vcores.


Edited by Tyler Lowe - 20 Jan 2008 at 9:35pm
Back to Top
phantomdog View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 116 		  Quote phantomdog Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 22 Jan 2008 at 6:39am
With those higer vcores set by DS for oc purposes and thier guarantee for 100% stability, what issues does that bring into play?  I wouldn't think they would set the Vcores that high if there was a probability of "damage" to the RAM or other components.
NVIDIA 780i Core 2 Quad
4GB DDR2 Corsair 1066MHz Dominator
2 Quad Core Q9450 3.5Ghz
8800GTX 768MB SLI
Liquid Chilled FrostBite CPU
X-FI XtremeGamer
850W SilverStone PSU
TJ-9 Extreme
Vista 64
Back to Top
skyR View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Digital Storm Apprentice


Joined: 08 Oct 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2220 		  Quote skyR Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 22 Jan 2008 at 8:18am
higher voltages = more heat and lowers lifespan of component
The only thing that keeps me wishing on a wishing star.
Back to Top
Bill the Cat View Drop Down
DS Veteran
DS Veteran

Forum Bitch!
Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1150 		  Quote Bill the Cat Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 22 Jan 2008 at 10:47am
Originally posted by phantomdog

With those higer vcores set by DS for oc purposes and thier guarantee for 100% stability, what issues does that bring into play?  I wouldn't think they would set the Vcores that high if there was a probability of "damage" to the RAM or other components.
 
I have a hard time interpreting the Intel data sheet on this subject. I think it's trying to tell you that for an E6850, for example,
Vc >= 1.55 V, kills the part; at least all bets are off.
Vc <= 1.5 V, the part will fuction but its life span may be reduced from say 10 years to just a few.
Vc= Vid = 1.335 or so, the part should run for a decade or more.
I'm toasting my CPU pretty hard compared to guys like skyR and Taylor, but I run Prime95 for at least 8 hr. and my temps are only in the mid 40s C.
3.6 GHz E6850,       4 GB RAM, GTS 250,   TJ9, Win 7 64-bit
4.4 GHz i7 3930K, 16 GB RAM, GTX 670, 550D, Win 7 64-bit
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.0703125 seconds.