Post Your Overclock!

Here's mine Q9650 3GHz overclocked to 4050MHz (4.05GHz) stable and temps @ 40 degrees not one problem she's purring love my computer
too bad couldn't bump up FSB to 2GHz it's all good

Wishmaster said:

Running a x8 Multi and 500FSB (4.0Ghz) on a 9650quad is nice :)

But hardly ideal IMO for a 24/7 OC

I should know..:) love my 9650 but i do not run 24/7 what i posted
I run 3.6GHz (20% OC) 24/7 safe this cpu loves to be played with unreal

Note: OC ing not for novices...do not attempt unless you know what you're doing:) please get advice from someone who knows please for the sake of your machine (or lack of it).

grimreaper said:

Here's mine Q9650 3GHz overclocked to 4050MHz (4.05GHz) stable and temps @ 40 degrees not one problem she's purring love my computer
too bad couldn't bump up FSB to 2GHz it's all good

nice clocks.......:)


my Q9450 is starting to grate on me now, my new GPU needs a faster throughput, but i cannot get my chip stable over 3.6ghz no matter what what voltages i chuck at it

the 9x multi certainly helps.....

skunksmash said:

my Q9450 is starting to grate on me now, my new GPU needs a faster throughput, but i cannot get my chip stable over 3.6ghz no matter what what voltages i chuck at it

the 9x multi certainly helps.....

I want to kick mine in it's metaphoric balls.

It will do 4.0ghz, with 'max' volts but not stable. It will not do over 448 FSB + 8Gb with any stability. Drop to 4GB and I may get up to 3.88ish

447 FSB + 8GB and I can lower the timings to 4-4-4-12. Go to 448 FSb and BLAM not even loosing them to hooker standards will help

I'm not using murderous volts just for extra bang.


I feel your frustration

smarteyeball said:

skunksmash said:

my Q9450 is starting to grate on me now, my new GPU needs a faster throughput, but i cannot get my chip stable over 3.6ghz no matter what what voltages i chuck at it

the 9x multi certainly helps.....

I want to kick mine in it's metaphoric balls.

It will do 4.0ghz, with 'max' volts but not stable. It will not do over 448 FSB + 8Gb with any stability. Drop to 4GB and I may get up to 3.88ish

447 FSB + 8GB and I can lower the timings to 4-4-4-12. Go to 448 FSb and BLAM not even loosing them to hooker standards will help

I'm not using murderous volts just for extra bang.


I feel your frustration

lol....... now you've said that my issue could well be the 8gb im running, even though the RAM is underclocked with a 1-1 ratio, the memory controller may be struggling...

god..... my board has served me well, but she's starting to show her age....


i might whip out 4gb & see if she'll go higher, b/c like you i can post @ 4ghz (500fsb) but its not AT ALL stable.

yep. I only got closer to stable when I trialled with only 4GB. (RAM speed was awesome with only 4GB)


Although, in the interim with a newer bios, I can actually use those 4-4-4-12 timings with 8GB. Before, I had to to lower right down to 6-6-6-18-60? So at least there has been 'some' improvement'

Still can't get 8GB over 895mhz with errors though

smarteyeball said:

yep. I only got closer to stable when I trialled with only 4GB. (RAM speed was awesome with only 4GB)


Although, in the interim with a newer bios, I can actually use those 4-4-4-12 timings with 8GB. Before, I had to to lower right down to 6-6-6-18-60? So at least there has been 'some' improvement'

Still can't get 8GB over 895mhz with errors though

hmm....... i can run mine @ 1157mhz 6-6-6-18, but upon benching them i actually see no performance increase over 904mhz 5-5-5-18..??, so i think the 1-1 ratio is still the best bet in my case.

im sure its the chip though, a bad batch maybe..... i only payed £80 delivered in an OEM pack, so im thinking the guy realized the chip whouldnt clock well & sold it...

im in two minds with my next upgrade now due to this bloody ATI card...

do i...

buy an X48 board, use my current H/W & hope the PCIE 2.0 slots will open this card out.. i mean the C2Q is still plenty powerful enough for most things, its only this card that's making the bottleneck apparent.

or....

go ''i7'' (CPU/MOBO/RAM), swab out the lot.... this will be the best bet for the future, but not very practical on the wallet..

if my major problem here is bandwidth, will the X48 open the throughput enough to give me the performance i should be seeing, or is the lack of ''QPI'' the reason my card is choking..??

lol....its an annoying dilemma....

With 4GB at a much higher mhz rate, i was getting better overall bandwidth - but the latency was the same.

With my current 8GB config, I see a slighly lower overall bandwidth, but am at least getting the equavilent latency with 8GB as i was with 4GB.

In real world usage, outside of benchmarks, I could not tell the difference


As for your current dilemma:

Cheap route - x48 : dubious improvement, however you would notice an improvement, but you are still CPU limited.

1366 x58 - Much more noticeable improvement.

Personally I'm holding off for a few more months and going the whole i7 route. The $$$ factor is the biggest problem though


For now, this will have to do - I'm already fed up with tweaking again

smarteyeball said:

With 4GB at a much higher mhz rate, i was getting better overall bandwidth - but the latency was the same.

With my current 8GB config, I see a slighly lower overall bandwidth, but am at least getting the equavilent latency with 8GB as i was with 4GB.

In real world usage, outside of benchmarks, I could not tell the difference


As for your current dilemma:

Cheap route - x48 : dubious improvement, however you would notice an improvement, but you are still CPU limited.

1366 x58 - Much more noticeable improvement.

Personally I'm holding off for a few more months and going the whole i7 route. The $$$ factor is the biggest problem though


For now, this will have to do - I'm already fed up with tweaking again

yep.....your RAM is delivering much better bandwith than mine currently is, my ''read'' is around 7200mb/s (8gb 904mhz 5-5-5-18)

but CL4 is bloody good for nearly 900mhz....:)


i think i'll hold off on the X48, considering im gonna wanna be on i7 by 2011 anyway...