Overclocking my E6750 - 3.8GHz so far :D

[Regalk]

You will fight with the OC beyond 3600 and will eventuall give up - mine is stable for last 2 weeks at 3720 (465 FSB) at 1.5v (vdroop 1.39) on the P5K-E wifi (Asus has a terrible vdroop issue)
The 6750 is golden as are the Q6600 GO

 

[downhiller80]

Originally posted by: RegalkYou will fight with the OC beyond 3600 and will eventuall give up

Oh I will will I ;-)

3704 (8 x 463) seems pretty stable so far - 3hrs into Orthos and no problems.

Unfortunately this is my work PC and without it I can't earn any money, so I feel I should tread carefully until I build a spare PC. That said I'm stupid and will ignore my own advice and see if 3.8 boots later on ;-)

Originally posted by: VirtualLarryHit CTRL+F1 at the main bios menu screen to active the hidden settings.

Cheers, I had read that somewhere else and tried it but it didn't seem to do anything so I assumed the DS4 didn't have that - just tried again and it worked this time

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Its not like 100mhz faster is going to change the universe for you. I understand its fun to try and push it to its limits, but just run 3.6 you will most likely be stable forever and its plenty fast.

 

[downhiller80]

Yeah I know, first time I've done any overclocking since I had my Duron 650 @1GHz though, like you say it's fun isn't it.

 

[downhiller80]

3.8

The OCing bug has definitely bitten me once more, will be buying an E8400 fairly soon I fear!

 

[Regalk]

Originally posted by: sebfrost
3.8

The OCing bug has definitely bitten me once more, will be buying an E8400 fairly soon I fear!

It will become an addiction and thousands of $$ later what did I really achieve - mountains of motherboard boxes, heatsinks/fans, cables etc. hmmm

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: Regalk
It will become an addiction and thousands of $$ later what did I really achieve - mountains of motherboard boxes, heatsinks/fans, cables etc. hmmm

Not necessary to remind good people of the cold reality

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Seems like 3.6 is a hardwall for these chips. You can get a bit past but you start to see diminishing returns where you have to add serious vcore to take it any higher.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised. with the specs in my sig I'm Orthos stable for 15 hours at 55C but I eventually had to do some freakin WORK with the machine. It's hard for me to set aside 15 hours time for any of my computers. 3.6 is just dandy for me, I have no interest in jacking the VCore up any further. Dang, a 933 MHz stable OC is as much as I could ever ask for.

Strange thing is, with this little brute, I can run Orthos full blast, and still play music and browse the Web with no lag. Incredible. MAN, I love this thing!

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: Yoxxy
Seems like 3.6 is a hardwall for these chips. You can get a bit past but you start to see diminishing returns where you have to add serious vcore to take it any higher.

Dude. E8500 at 4.655 GHz? Overclock the snot out of that thing. C'mon, 5 GHz or bust! What are you, a girly man?

Originally posted by: sebfrost
I read Anand's review and am happy that it'll be ok where it is. Certainly it runs through 3dmark06 (8800, does that sound about right?) with no problems.

That seems a little low to me. It should break 12K easily, that card is faster than mine.

Originally posted by: sebfrost
Amazing how much difference the TIM curing can make, a week later and my idle temps have dropped to 25/28C (running at 3.2GHz /1.325v) and load temps dropped to 48C

Just to make you green, MY idle temps are 19-20C at 3.6 using the same measurement tools along with SpeedFan.

 

[downhiller80]

Hmm, just run it again, get 9208.

Main Test Results

3DMark Score 9208 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 4025 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 3528 Marks
CPU Score 3232 Marks


Detailed Test Results

Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 33.101 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 33.982 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 1.023 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 1.633 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 36.325 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 34.233 FPS

Feature Tests
Fill Rate - Single Texturing N/A
Fill Rate - Multi Texturing N/A
Pixel Shader N/A
Vertex Shader - Simple N/A
Vertex Shader - Complex N/A
Shader Particles (SM 3.0) N/A
Perlin Noise (SM 3.0) N/A

Batch Size Tests
8 Triangles N/A
32 Triangles N/A
128 Triangles N/A
512 Triangles N/A
2048 Triangles N/A
32768 Triangles N/A

Should all of those be N/A? Which of the tests look suspect if any, taking my system into account?

 

[UTFan81]

thanks for this detailed thread on the e6750. I will be trying some of your same overclocks on my system soon.

 

[odahcam]

Anyone out there have a detailed guide on overclocking my specific system? I'm a VC (virgin clocker) can't get mine over 3.3GHz

 

[Phunk0ne]

Sebfrost:

yes those should be all N/A. Even when you turn those tests on, it does not count towards your end result. What is your VCore reading in CPU-Z under Idle and Load? Just curious =)

Screenshots 3DMark06 Results

 

[downhiller80]

So should my 8800GT be that much slower than your GTS, or is something up? I run a dual-monitor setup, would that be impacting on my scores?

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: sebfrost
So should my 8800GT be that much slower than your GTS, or is something up? I run a dual-monitor setup, would that be impacting on my scores?

It shouldn't at all. Using the default test setup uses only a single display. I THINK the GTS's are a bit faster but AFAIK they're neck and neck. Check the card using the NVidia display utility. Like I said, you should be getting around 12K at default. Remember that 3DMark has a heavy CPU component - the faster the CPU, the higher the scores tend to be. Check your PCI-E slot settings. It might only be running 4x or 8x instead of 16x.

 

[lopri]

Current G92 SKUs (GT, GTS) are seriously bottlenecked (boy, I hate this cliché) by memory bandwidth. It's a shame because the core has a lot more headroom especially with better cooling and extra voltages.

 

[lopri]

Wait, dual-monitor setup? That'd definitely impact the score. By all means, there are extra pixels the GPU has to push on one monitor while the test is running on the other.

 

[downhiller80]

Well I tried disabling one monitor and whilst I didn't bother running the whole test the FPS looked identical to what I'd got before.

How do I adjust the speed of my PCI-E? I'll go and have a look in the BIOS. I only have PCI-E, not PCI-E2, but from what I read before I bought my board it makes very little difference at the moment.

 

[downhiller80]

Hmm, in the nvida control panel it does indeed say PCI-Express x4 as opposed to x16. I'm betting this is because I chose to put my card in the secondary slot because that worked better with my case arrangement, and the manual for my board seemed to say they were both x16 capable?

 

[downhiller80]

Well switching it over certainly made a difference - about 25 to 50% noticable increase in framerate, and score now up to 11623.

Main Test Results
3DMark Score 11623 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 5164 Marks
SM 3.0 Score 4914 Marks
CPU Score 3232 Marks

Detailed Test Results

Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 42.503 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 43.562 FPS

CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 1.032 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 1.62 FPS

HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 46.496 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 51.785 FPS

(running at 3.7GHz, 3.8 turned out not to be stable so I'm back to 3.7 for now)

 

[Phunk0ne]

that looks a whole lot better sebforst. The GTS has a slight advantage over the GT. GTS @ 128 Shaders vs GT @ 112. But also, I have my GTS verclocked. But all in all, the difference is only minimal during games.
You have 1.50000 set in BIOS @ 3.8? Try 1.50625. my 3.8GHz was unstable in ORTHOS @ 1.50000 BIOS, but when I upped it just one notch, it was rocksolid.

 

[downhiller80]

Actually I was mistaken when I wrote 1.5 on here, I couldnt remember what I'd set it to - was 1.475. Was stable on orthos for a few hours but then BSODed. I didn't bother trying to bump it up at the time because I was in the middle of some work, so just went back to last known good.

edit: just rebooted, trying 3.8 @ 1.5v now (CPU-Z: 1.472v idle 1.456v load). For no real-world benefit at all obviously, just cos I'm a sucker

 

[Phunk0ne]

well that would make all overclockers suckers, eh?
Ever since my Celeron 300A time, I have always tried to push everything out of my computer. When I have a bigger budget to play with in a few months, I will do a suicide run with this chip on air

anyways, @ 1.5 ORTHOS would fail on me after a few hours, but everything else would run, even 3DM06, but I do not trust my cpu if it is not stable in ORTHOS, and upping it by 0.006520V from 1.5V gave me just what I needed to run this sucker @ 3.8GHz.

 

[downhiller80]

Well there's definitely a difference between 3.6 and 2.66, I can detect things being slower. 3.6 and 3.8, well... bit tenuous innit, as someone above said

 

[Phunk0ne]

very true indeed. But I think I may have found the "sweet spot", 3.6GHz stable @ 1.40000 BIOS