Are 2.6Cs really crappy OCers?

M

mtbaird

Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
677
from the threadsd ive been seeing why are they such horrible OCers? ive been able to get my 2.4 to 3.4 easily just like others and then some people cant get there 2.6 very high at all

why is that?
 
I've had one's that do 290fsb on air, and then others that wont go over 2.9ghz.
 
Originally posted by Tedinde
I've had one's that do 290fsb on air, and then others that wont go over 2.9ghz.
Click to expand...

Its like that ^^^ with all processors mtbaird. Even a really good overclocker like the 2.4c wont always do what you had plans for it to. Its pretty much a luck of the draw but the majority will overclock pretty well. I've seen some pretty high overclocks on 2.6c's so i wouldn't call them bad overclockers at all.
 
I have my P4C 2.6 at 3.2 Ghz on default VCORE, I think that 650 Mhz above stock speed with air cooling is pretty good:) , I wonder what i would get with a half decent water cooling system?
 
I just spent the last four days building a watercooling system. I will post pictures later. It consists of a flowmaster xt standard kit with a DTEK White Water, and a Hydor L30. Flow is set up this way: pump -> wblock ->res. -> heater core -> pump. Flow is amazing, and my temps never get above 23 c running at 3.7ghz and 1.775 vcore. However, I can't get stable above 3.33 ghz right now. Do you guys think that this is a good overclock or not? Also does prime 95 have a problem (version 3.0) running in windows xp with certain programs open? I ask because I was running at 3.4 ghz and ran prime for 7 hours overnight, and then the next day, I couldnt' run prime for more than 43 mins (dual prime) while watching a movie in Windows Media player. Neways, those are my results, waiting for 3.0 ghz prescott next month for upgrade.
 
aight thanks guys i stand corrected, i think i just saw 2 posts about them and assumed the worse hah
 
Originally posted by pakotlar
I just spent the last four days building a watercooling system. I will post pictures later. It consists of a flowmaster xt standard kit with a DTEK White Water, and a Hydor L30. Flow is set up this way: pump -> wblock ->res. -> heater core -> pump. Flow is amazing, and my temps never get above 23 c running at 3.7ghz and 1.775 vcore. However, I can't get stable above 3.33 ghz right now. Do you guys think that this is a good overclock or not? Also does prime 95 have a problem (version 3.0) running in windows xp with certain programs open? I ask because I was running at 3.4 ghz and ran prime for 7 hours overnight, and then the next day, I couldnt' run prime for more than 43 mins (dual prime) while watching a movie in Windows Media player. Neways, those are my results, waiting for 3.0 ghz prescott next month for upgrade.
Click to expand...

1.775v is a lot of voltage even on watercooling, especially on an Asus board which characteristically overvolt a lot. Is this voltage you mention the actual voltage from the readout, or what you selected in the bios? If it is what you selected in the Bios I would assume that you've been running up to 1.8v under load and as high as 1.85v idle, these are dangerous voltages for Northwoods and could have damaged your CPU.
 
My 2.6c runs at 3.4 rock stable at 1.6 volt. :)
That is the max I can get out of it tho. Even with higher
voltage it will not do anymore.
I'm using water to.

But that is a d@mn nice overclock anyway u look at it.
800mhz more out of a cpu is very good. :)

I run it at 3.34 all the time. I always back down
just a little off of max.
But it's sure fast. :D
 
I think the general consensus is, they're not the "de facto" overclocking group of intel cpu's. However, that doesn't mean a gem can't be had in that group. I'd still stick to a 2.4C, 2.8C, or 3.0C.
 
Originally posted by Nitro16
1.775v is a lot of voltage even on watercooling, especially on an Asus board which characteristically overvolt a lot. Is this voltage you mention the actual voltage from the readout, or what you selected in the bios? If it is what you selected in the Bios I would assume that you've been running up to 1.8v under load and as high as 1.85v idle, these are dangerous voltages for Northwoods and could have damaged your CPU.
Click to expand...
The newer Asus boards undervolt drastically when idle actually, overvolting is a myth based on their older series.
My P4C800 runs 1.47-1.5 when set to stock (1.525) when under load, and currently running 1.625 in the bios to get 1.54-1.56 under load. Idle is still a little higher than what you set it to but it's close to what is set in the bios.
If I remember correctly the same was the case with my P4P800.

As for 2.6Cs being bad oc'ers, they are not but nothing spectacular either. Mine did 3.2 (257fsb), booted on stock but needed 1.55 actual to be stable. The same as my 2.4C (also stuck at 245-250 depending on vcore) and now my 2.8C, tried different mobos and ram so it isn't that. Around 245fsb seem to be the sweet spot for all P4Cs I get so based on that 2.6C is better than 2.4C ;) Might try another 2.4C for fun now they're insanely cheap though.
 
I have a 2.4B running at 3.2Ghz rock stable, voltage at 1.56...doesn't get more stable at higher clocks when I raise the voltage either (real bummer too...I was sooo wanting to hit 800fsb with my 533fsb chip...instead I must settle for 720)
 
My P4 2.6 is damned nice... still have some headway left in this baby, just need faster than DDR570 RAM (1:1 man!) :D

The 2.4's and 2.6's seem to offer the "most" in terms of overclocking return, but like any other chips, there are good ones that overclock to the roof and there are bad ones (like my old 2.4C that won't do 2.9).
 
Originally posted by SimGuy
My P4 2.6 is damned nice... still have some headway left in this baby, just need faster than DDR570 RAM (1:1 man!) :D

The 2.4's and 2.6's seem to offer the "most" in terms of overclocking return, but like any other chips, there are good ones that overclock to the roof and there are bad ones (like my old 2.4C that won't do 2.9).
Click to expand...

Nice man...The is some nice cooling you have also though...
 
From what I've experienced, the 2.6C's are actually fairly nice for overclocking. Both me and a friend of mine have 2.6's that do 3.4GHz no prob and I'm gonna be pushing mine up to 3.45GHz with the PC4000EL I've got on the way. After that I'll kick in the 5:4 dram ratio to see how high the chip can go to help me make up my mind on whether or not I'll pick up some PC4400 to take my system even further.

Rock on my friend, and do not pass up the chance to pick up an overclocking gem like what some of us already have around here, it's just to much fun. :p
 
I will be ordering a new chip from newegg, and I cant decide, 2.4C, 2.6C, or 2.8C. Which one would you buy to oc??
 
The 2.4C is the most logical choice if you're going to OC, being the cheapest.....but there's more to it then that. If you HAVE a setup capable of well of 250FSB then sure, go for the 2.4C. However, if your rig gets held back at 250FSB (due to your ram or whatever else) or so it might be best to look at one of the other two, seeing as you'll achieve a higher CPU clock at that same, limited FSB.
 
I've been running a 2.6 at 3.25 with default voltage for months.

One of the best overclocking processors I've had, actually.

B
 
Originally posted by brentsg
I've been running a 2.6 at 3.25 with default voltage for months.

One of the best overclocking processors I've had, actually.

B
Click to expand...

ditto.....when i had mine. ;)

Only reason I got the 2.6C was to have a higher clock at a certain FSB 'cus I was kinda limited at the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top