Post Your Overclock!

[Wishmaster]

Maybe I see OCing a bit differently than some.

Meaning: I think theres a Difference between OCing, and benching for the fun of it, and to see what your rig is capable of ...

And a 24/7 OC are 2 different things.

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

But hardly ideal IMO for a 24/7 OC

better off at x9 400 (3.6Ghz)... Far less heat, power consumption, and much less wear and tear.

And truth be told... In real world use, and most gaming, theres really not much of a differnce. not really worth it for 24/7 use.

Seems to me, anything over the 20% range results in greatly increased diminishing returns. At least in my exp.


OCing is a lot of fun however

just my 2c for what its worth.



Oh and BTW:

Nice OC TomPC3

 

[grimreaper]

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

 

[grimreaper]

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).

 

[skunksmash]

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.....

 

[smarteyeball]

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

 

[skunksmash]

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.

 

[smarteyeball]

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

 

[skunksmash]

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....

 

[smarteyeball]

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

 

[skunksmash]

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

View attachment 46112

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...

 

[smarteyeball]

In 4Gb config, the read is in the 9k+ area

It's the read that's important for game loading etc isn't it? I always forget which is responsible for which

Can't complain though

Save your pennies mate - no point 'upgrading' and discovering you are disappointed with the results.

Remember, somebody, somewhere will always have a a much better rig - the so and so's Avoiding vsisiting overclocking forums can help with that

 

[skunksmash]

In 4Gb config, the read is in the 9k+ area

It's the read that's important for game loading etc isn't it? I always forget which is responsible for which

Can't complain though

Save your pennies mate - no point 'upgrading' and discovering you are disappointed with the results.

Remember, somebody, somewhere will always have a a much better rig - the so and so's Avoiding vsisiting overclocking forums can help with that

LMAO........ yeah my eyes always get bigger than my belly when i see bench numbers

im also sure its the ''read'' that's most important (could be wrong)


.....X58 here i come

 

[smarteyeball]

Yeah, I'm perfectly fine until i start visiting those sites... Especially the 'voltage envy'

I've been trying to concentrate on the read speed and latency, but they are the two that cause so much bloody trouble...

Plus I'm sick to death of the sight of memtest :roflmao:

 

[skunksmash]

Yeah, I'm perfectly fine until i start visiting those sites... Especially the 'voltage envy'

I've been trying to concentrate on the read speed and latency, but they are the two that cause so much bloody trouble...

Plus I'm sick to death of the sight of memtest :roflmao:

..... i hate ''memtest'', i just use ''Orthos'' on ''blend & stress'' to test the sticks stability, its a damn site quicker, maybe not as thorougher...but its served my RAM OCs for years.

...in a few weeks i'll have to break the news to my missus about the X58 changeover.. (she thinks my rig has had enough maintenance, its more than she gets , so she's a little jealous)

 

[smarteyeball]

I find memtest is good for quick for timing test adjustments. Make a BIOS change, select an individual test, (usually test 5) do a pass or two, fail -start again. Success, let it run for 12hrs+.

Memtests weakness is that it only concentrates on the RAM, so no CPU stress is involved. That's where the advantage of Orthos and P95 come into it. It stresses both. Which I'm also sick of watching


As for the missues, start by casually dropping hints that the happier "dad" is, the more maintenance she'll get

 

[skunksmash]

I find memtest is good for quick for timing test adjustments. Make a BIOS change, select an individual test, (usually test 5) do a pass or two, fail -start again. Success, let it run for 12hrs+.

Memtests weakness is that it only concentrates on the RAM, so no CPU stress is involved. That's where the advantage of Orthos and P95 come into it. It stresses both. Which I'm also sick of watching


As for the missues, start by casually dropping hints that the happier "dad" is, the more maintenance she'll get

Good plan.....

 

[grimreaper]

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.....

Thank you skunksmash, i can feel your fustrations, it can cause you misery, but don't feel bad.
I had the Q9450 (on an evga 780i bios p07) loved it, and if my memory serves me correctly, I OC'd that baby from 2.66GHz to 3.4GHz max also as you know the ram has alot to do with it.

 

[grimreaper]

.....X58 here i come

Amen, same here got it all planned out late this yr just saving $$ like everyone else out there im budgeting pretty large, and to be honest likely the last major upgrade in a long time.

 

[skunksmash]

.....X58 here i come

Amen, same here got it all planned out late this yr just saving $$ like everyone else out there im budgeting pretty large, and to be honest likely the last major upgrade in a long time.

.....i said that last year when i bought the Quad, 8GB of RAM & a GTX260.

WHEN WILL IT END....LOL

 

[Wishmaster]

At 400FSB 333/800 Strap and 8GB RAM at 960ish ..

mines showing a little over 8100Mb/s with 5-5-5-12
So far im happy with this as 24/7 OC, as it only needs 1.32NB core to be happy
and runs cool.
For my board, past this, with 8GB RAM things start really taking a lot more juice.


Ive seen some get theses Q9650s over 500FSB ... I couldnt with mine regardless how hard i tried to push it though Guess I dont have that "magical" chip

Best I could do was a x8 multi 485 FSB but that was only with 2 sticks (4GB)

But with all slots full, 450ish bout all I could manage
And at that it takes a good deal to get stable. Far more than Im comfy with for 24/7.


As far as stress , Im a HUGE fan of IBT. especially when your looking for that FSB wall etc.
5 minutes = something like 8hrs Prime 95 (or so they say)

I know it does tend to find instabilities really fast.