Can a Zalman CNPS 9700LED ( http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16835118019 ) allow a Q6600 to be overclocked to 3.2Ghz (400Mhz FSB w/ 8x mult) without having it go over about 65 C? Oh yeah, if it matters this'll be in a P182 Case and a eVGA 680i mobo.
Can a CNPS9700 LED OC a Q6600 to 3.2Ghz?
- Thread starter CountChoculaBot
- Start date
I don't think it will do it. It might be able to hold it at idle, but not at a load. You have to remember that the q6600's are very hot chips.
Yes, but since most people are waiting til the 22nd for the price cuts, most of the available q6600 are from the old revisions...aka hot cpus.
JEDIYoda
Lifer
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,986
- 3,320
- 126
I know this is a bit off the subject but I had my old p4 3.2 EE overclocked to 4.2 stable using the zalman 9700.....I believe i might have even posted screen shots somewhere...
I will have to dig around and see if I have them....
Peace!!!
I would say give it a try...good luck!!
I will have to dig around and see if I have them....
Peace!!!
I would say give it a try...good luck!!
I have a Zalman 9700 on an E6600 and Asus 680i easily overclocked to 3.0 GHZ stable. It is idle at 41 degrees on silent mode. When I jack up the fan speed, it cools down to 35-36 degrees. I have not put it under load on the new heatsink yet. But, it maxed out at 55 degrees on my previous cooler, a Scythe Ninja.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 15,950
- 1,604
- 126
AigoMorla and I had a discussion about this a few weeks ago. He insists that you need water-cooling to REALLY OC a Q6600.
To reach the ultimate OC, I'd have to concede and agree with him.
But let me make a point here. First, it's already been said that this is a very hot processor -- the Q6600. It has nearly double the TDP at stock as the E6600 -- it's up there with the old Prescott units that threw off around 103W of thermal power.
Second, you're buying this CPU because it's going to give you double the processing power of the E6600 -- four cores instead of two. So you get a significant performance gain, even at stock settings.
Third, my own view about over-clocking is that even with a processor OC'd to the limit, if there are bottlenecks down the "computer-architecture" storage pyramid, you're still not configuring a system that has well-balanced performance unless you can open up those bottlenecks.
So finally, I suggest this. You CAN over-clock a Q6600 on air and open up the memory bottleneck as much as you might want. But you'd do it by dropping the multiplier on the Q6600 first, then raising the FSB and DDR2 speeds. Under those circumstances, you might either just break even on the stock processor speed, or squeeze a few hundred Mhz extra from the over-clocking, and the thermal wattage might still be close to the stock thermal wattage.
So -- yeah -- you could OC a Q6600 with a CNPS-9500 or 9700, and even better with a ThermalRight Ultra-120 Extreme or a recent revision of a Scythe cooler. But starting at 2.4 Ghz (the stock Q6600 speed), getting to 3.2 Ghz isn't so likely.
Instead, consider dropping the multiplier to 8, giving you an underclocked speed of around 2.13 Ghz. You should then be able to run up the FSB (as "external frequency"). I'd shoot for maybe 2.7 Ghz, and here I'm only guessing, because I haven't ordered my Q6600 yet. But even there, the Q6600 should "kick butt" on an E6600 OC'd to between 3 and 3.4 Ghz.
I think the thermal power under those circumstances would be well under the limit by many of the better heatpipe coolers.
To reach the ultimate OC, I'd have to concede and agree with him.
But let me make a point here. First, it's already been said that this is a very hot processor -- the Q6600. It has nearly double the TDP at stock as the E6600 -- it's up there with the old Prescott units that threw off around 103W of thermal power.
Second, you're buying this CPU because it's going to give you double the processing power of the E6600 -- four cores instead of two. So you get a significant performance gain, even at stock settings.
Third, my own view about over-clocking is that even with a processor OC'd to the limit, if there are bottlenecks down the "computer-architecture" storage pyramid, you're still not configuring a system that has well-balanced performance unless you can open up those bottlenecks.
So finally, I suggest this. You CAN over-clock a Q6600 on air and open up the memory bottleneck as much as you might want. But you'd do it by dropping the multiplier on the Q6600 first, then raising the FSB and DDR2 speeds. Under those circumstances, you might either just break even on the stock processor speed, or squeeze a few hundred Mhz extra from the over-clocking, and the thermal wattage might still be close to the stock thermal wattage.
So -- yeah -- you could OC a Q6600 with a CNPS-9500 or 9700, and even better with a ThermalRight Ultra-120 Extreme or a recent revision of a Scythe cooler. But starting at 2.4 Ghz (the stock Q6600 speed), getting to 3.2 Ghz isn't so likely.
Instead, consider dropping the multiplier to 8, giving you an underclocked speed of around 2.13 Ghz. You should then be able to run up the FSB (as "external frequency"). I'd shoot for maybe 2.7 Ghz, and here I'm only guessing, because I haven't ordered my Q6600 yet. But even there, the Q6600 should "kick butt" on an E6600 OC'd to between 3 and 3.4 Ghz.
I think the thermal power under those circumstances would be well under the limit by many of the better heatpipe coolers.
lopri
Elite Member
- Jul 27, 2002
- 13,308
- 685
- 126
It depends on your CPU but many would think Zalman can't cut it. What others say about quad overclocking is that the temperature of CPU will be the first thing that hinders overclocking. If you think about overclocking in general, there can be many bottlenecks. Sometimes motherboard won't be able to hit high FSB, or memory is weak, or the PSU isn't strong enough, etc. With quads, it's often the temperature of CPU that'll keep itself from clocking higher.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 15,950
- 1,604
- 126
Well, I don't disagree with LOPRI. But if the stock TDP of the Q6600 is somewhere between 100W and 120W, and assuming the motherboard and memory are made for high performance, then dropping the multiplier and upping the FSB modestly should work.
I say this because the Zalman cooler works fine with other processors that have similar stock TDP's and allows you to over-clock them. Now -- certainly -- if the thermal power of the Q6600 rises differently from -- say -- a Smithfield or early Presler when you overclock it, there would be some severe limitations. But if the thermal power at multiplier 7 or 8 pushing the FSB back to an equivalent 2.4 or 2.5 Ghz speed roughly matches the stock TDP, then I'd say it's feasible -- but not to the level the OP wants (what was it? 3.2 Ghz?)
Anyway, why the h*** would you want to use a Zalman CNPS 9500 or 9700 when you could use a TR ULtra-120 or Extreme? Or maybe an IFX-14 or Ultima 90? The only reasons I can think of are "looks" and motherboard compatibility issues -- size.
For me, I'm probably going to find out per the strategy of dropping the multiplier, but I already have some "advance intelligence" about this from a reseller customer review. And the point was made that you got a huge boost in performance over an E6600 just for having four cores, while you could drop to multiplier 8 and maybe get to 2.7 Ghz on air with no trouble.
I say this because the Zalman cooler works fine with other processors that have similar stock TDP's and allows you to over-clock them. Now -- certainly -- if the thermal power of the Q6600 rises differently from -- say -- a Smithfield or early Presler when you overclock it, there would be some severe limitations. But if the thermal power at multiplier 7 or 8 pushing the FSB back to an equivalent 2.4 or 2.5 Ghz speed roughly matches the stock TDP, then I'd say it's feasible -- but not to the level the OP wants (what was it? 3.2 Ghz?)
Anyway, why the h*** would you want to use a Zalman CNPS 9500 or 9700 when you could use a TR ULtra-120 or Extreme? Or maybe an IFX-14 or Ultima 90? The only reasons I can think of are "looks" and motherboard compatibility issues -- size.
For me, I'm probably going to find out per the strategy of dropping the multiplier, but I already have some "advance intelligence" about this from a reseller customer review. And the point was made that you got a huge boost in performance over an E6600 just for having four cores, while you could drop to multiplier 8 and maybe get to 2.7 Ghz on air with no trouble.
SolMiester
Diamond Member
- Dec 19, 2004
- 5,330
- 17
- 76
Wouldn't the ambient temp of the air around the cooler have an effect on the temps of the cpu?. I ask because I am hoping to use the same Zalman in a TJ06 Silverstone and believe the fan should fit inside the tunnel, which should provide cool air to start with.
Current K8NS 939 Ultra here
Proposed DQ6 Notice cpu position better on this board
So with the better pos of the cpu am hoping the 9700 will fix snuggly inside the wind tunnel for greater cooling
Current K8NS 939 Ultra here
Proposed DQ6 Notice cpu position better on this board
So with the better pos of the cpu am hoping the 9700 will fix snuggly inside the wind tunnel for greater cooling
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 18K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
Facebook
Twitter