• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Hitting the wall with a C2D

S

shaggy77

Gawd
2FA
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Messages
803
Hi,

How do you tell when you hit a wall with a processor? I know the question sounds dumb but I am trying to narrow down the more common items before I say, "Yup that is the wall"

Here are the system specs.

Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R motherboard
Intel E6420 C2D
Crucial Ballistix PC 6400 DDR2 (2X1GB)
EVGA 7600 GT
SB X-FI Gamer
Seagate 250 BG SATA HDD
DVD Burner
DVD ROM
Antec Earthwatts 430

All housed in a Antec 900 case.

My current max stable clock right now is 3.44 GHZ (430X8 Vcore 1.45-6 idle and 1.42 loaded) My current clock I backed it off to 3.2 GHZ(400X8 Vcore 1.35 IL/ 1.34LD) I have attempted twice unsuccessfully to make it to a stable 3.5 or 3.6. Yes I have attempted to increase the Vcore. I know with overclocking each CPU is different. Machines are different and so forth. However, the system feels strong. If feels like it can do better. I am thinking my PSU could be holding it up.

The processor has excellent cooling. There is plenty of cooling in the case. The ram does not feel taxed. It just when I try to go a bit faster, it just seems like something else holds it back. What do you guys think? PSU or "the wall" or something else?

Later,
shaggy
 
6420's have always been a crap shoot as to how they OC. 3.4@1.45 is a very good OC. To get to 3.5-3.6 you will probably need well past 1.5 volts.
 
I’d say you are in a good stable place as far as the CPU. A higher current PSU might well allow you to go a bit higher but the gain would be benchmark stuff, nothing you could “feel”.

For me, on my C2D E6600 I ended up at 1600/800 which gives me a nice comfortable 3.2 at a 1:1 ratio. I was able to drop my vcore at that point down to 1.31 which is just over VID.

The real problem IMHO is simply this, we have become used to so much power so quickly we are all spoiled.;)


 
Hi,

Thanks for the answers. I didn't know the 6420s where that much of a crap shoot. I thought they were pretty good from what I found about them. Either way any overclock is still good. You got the processor to run faster than factory set mandates. I may invest in a stronger PSU to get some more performance out of the machine. I guess my inner e-penis needs to be satisfied. :)

Thanks,
shaggy
 
3.2 at those voltages is plenty. 3.4 is on the edge. Personally, I don''t think pushing the voltages that high to get 200mhz more is worth it. You aren't going to see a difference in 200-300mhz but, your processor sure will in the voltages required. I wouldn't go higher than the 1.46 to get 3.4. That's my opinion though.
 
I just crank all the voltages as high as I'm comfortable with running and keep upping the FSB a little by little with the lowest multi to determine "the wall."
 
Most of that gen processor tap out at 3.2 to 3.4. A few get to 3.6, but those are a little more rare than most will let on. Anything above 3.0 GHz and you are golden.
 
It took a while but my E6400 ended up at 3600 MHz for 24/7 use. You need more voltage than what many users are comfortable running at. I need a bios setting of 1.525 volts which gives me 1.480 volts while running Orthos.

You will also need some good memory and you will probably have to tweak some of your chipset voltages upward until you are 100% stable. Practically speaking, it's not really worth the hassle getting up to the 3600 MHz mountain but the bragging rights are nice! :D
 
Cinge said:
3.2 at those voltages is plenty. 3.4 is on the edge. Personally, I don''t think pushing the voltages that high to get 200mhz more is worth it. You aren't going to see a difference in 200-300mhz but, your processor sure will in the voltages required. I wouldn't go higher than the 1.46 to get 3.4. That's my opinion though.
Click to expand...

QFT.

It's the law of diminishing returns. You won't see any noticeable difference from 3.4 to 3.6 like you would from 2.4 to 3.6.

Like a drag car, the difference between 75mph and 100mph is huge, but the difference between 300mph and 325mph is very, very small.
 
Hi,

Very interesting conversation we are having here. Well if speed is not really needed, then why have a processor push 3.0 GHz and further? I think we just don't see any need for it right now cause there is very little in software that can use that speed. Outside of making outlandish claims of super fast CPUs that can benchmark super insane numbers, there is really no reason for it. However, it is the tinkering side that says we need to go faster. When you can say well my particular set up can go X amount fast, you get people excited knowing their own rig will hopefully go that fast. Trust me I am thrilled that I can get to 3.2 with no problems. I can get to 3.44 with a little tweaking.

It's good to see an exchange of ideas. This way you can see where things fall in perspective. I think the best saying is YMMV. It is the best possible and most honest answer you can get.

later,
shaggy
 
Well, modern video cards present the CPU as the bottleneck. The trick is to have enough CPU to get out of the way.

So, as an example, you gain no more frame rates with 8800 GTX SLI at stock clocks after 3.6 GHz with a C2D. If you have OC'd versions, maybe 3.8 GHz. I have yet to run scaling on a single card, but I should probably try that out to see what is actually beneficial. I would hazard that a single 8800 GTX will not benefit much above 3.0 GHz on a C2D.
 
3d06 on a 8800gts stops improving around 3.2Ghz on C2D, just get higher cpu scores past there
 
shaggy77 said:
I have attempted twice unsuccessfully to make it to a stable 3.5 or 3.6. Yes I have attempted to increase the Vcore.
Click to expand...
I think you answered your own question - you have hit the wall. Whether or not you want to now use your computer, or spend time with very high voltages and extreme cooling is up to you. You may be able to push past the "wall" but you won't get much further. This information is based on the idea that you have ruled out all other possible BIOS features that may hold an overclock back, your hardware is installed correctly, and that you have bumped up your MCH voltage as well. I say settle for 3.2ghz and complete stability.
 
shaggy77 said:
Hi,

How do you tell when you hit a wall with a processor? I know the question sounds dumb but I am trying to narrow down the more common items before I say, "Yup that is the wall"

Here are the system specs.

Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R motherboard
Intel E6420 C2D
Crucial Ballistix PC 6400 DDR2 (2X1GB)
EVGA 7600 GT
SB X-FI Gamer
Seagate 250 BG SATA HDD
DVD Burner
DVD ROM
Antec Earthwatts 430

All housed in a Antec 900 case.

My current max stable clock right now is 3.44 GHZ (430X8 Vcore 1.45-6 idle and 1.42 loaded) My current clock I backed it off to 3.2 GHZ(400X8 Vcore 1.35 IL/ 1.34LD) I have attempted twice unsuccessfully to make it to a stable 3.5 or 3.6. Yes I have attempted to increase the Vcore. I know with overclocking each CPU is different. Machines are different and so forth. However, the system feels strong. If feels like it can do better. I am thinking my PSU could be holding it up.

The processor has excellent cooling. There is plenty of cooling in the case. The ram does not feel taxed. It just when I try to go a bit faster, it just seems like something else holds it back. What do you guys think? PSU or "the wall" or something else?

Later,
shaggy
Click to expand...

seanmcd said:
I think you answered your own question - you have hit the wall. Whether or not you want to now use your computer, or spend time with very high voltages and extreme cooling is up to you. You may be able to push past the "wall" but you won't get much further. This information is based on the idea that you have ruled out all other possible BIOS features that may hold an overclock back, your hardware is installed correctly, and that you have bumped up your MCH voltage as well. I say settle for 3.2ghz and complete stability.
Click to expand...

:puffs out cheeks:

Max O/Cing is a crap shoot, you need proc, mobo, memory, cooling and PSU to fall into place (not necessarily in that order, as well as luck of the O/C Gods, sacrificing a small child is rumoured to help :) )

Looking at the OP's specs the only thing I can think might be holding you back is PSU and memory.

What you need to think is it worth it (i mean added cost other than just getting a faster proc) for an O/C? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top