How hot is too hot on a E6400

[Relion]

For everyday use....

 

[TC91]

over 60c on full load. under 40c idle is fine too.

 

[Relion]

So far...On Stock Volts....CPU @ 2664Mhz (8*333), Memory @ 832Mhz, 4-4-4-12 ... running orthos first pass ... hasn't gone beyond 54C...stays normally on 53C...I ll let it running overnight and check tomorrow... does anyone knows how to disable speedstep on a MSI platinum P965 ?? :s

 

[TC91]

try doing 24hr dual prime small fft's (imo most effective stability test) and use coretemp to monitor temps, it creates a log file where u can find the peak temperature, and if the system is stable with speedstep/c1e on then why turn it off? speedstep/c1e saves power/energy and lets u run cooler in idle, prolonging the life of the chip.

 

[spinejam]

i had an e6400 running @ 3408mhz using 1.45vcore -- idled = 48 // load = 75 for ~ 1 year w/o incident. In fact it's still running @ that speed -- (my father-inlaw's 'puter now)

 

[TC91]

wow spinejam, that is pretty hot imo. good to hear nothing happened to it, gives me a sigh of relief for running my chip previously with 1.5125v in bios (1.48v actual @ 3.6ghz) for 5 months or so.

 

[Cutthroat]

Specs in sig, 40-45C idle, 58-60C full load, 1.4v.

 

[Relion]

Thanks guys for the answers....so far so good...I think I may stay at this speed...I feel confortable with it

 

[Denithor]

I have mine running 2.8GHz at stock voltage/cooling, idles @ 43C and bumps 62C in Orthos after about 10 minutes. Running F@H (single core version) it runs a steady 53-54C which I am comfortable with.

On a previous motherboard (965P-DS3 rev1) this cpu wouldn't clock stably above 2.66GHz on stock voltage, it has gone higher with my IP35-E and I plan to push it up further eventually (want better cooling first).

 

[LifeStealer]

70c load is max. <65c is good so its in range

 

[MarcVenice]

Small fft's gives an unrealistic temperature if you ask me. Even when playing Crysis, with the CPU pegged at 100% all the time, both cores, it doesn't get as hot as when I run orthos using small fft's. Large fft's gives a better estimation if you ask me.

 

[badnewcastle]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Small fft's gives an unrealistic temperature if you ask me. Even when playing Crysis, with the CPU pegged at 100% all the time, both cores, it doesn't get as hot as when I run orthos using small fft's. Large fft's gives a better estimation if you ask me.

Small fft's concentrates on cpu more and memory less, while large fft's concentrate on a mix of both. Games and everyday use is probably more closely related with large fft's right?

 

[TC91]

i use small fft's just so to completely verify cpu stability, the same for the 24hours. even if a real app wont ever push the cpu to those extents, i would rather have my cpu 100% stable. i ve had my cpu error in prime in 18hrs at slightly less voltage then what i am at right now, and that is why i also test for 24hrs. its much more safe to have your cpu stress tested to verify its stability, just in case you are doing something extremely important like a report, and the cpu decides to do whatever, then you would be pretty ticked off. thats just my take.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: TC91
i use small fft's just so to completely verify cpu stability, the same for the 24hours. even if a real app wont ever push the cpu to those extents, i would rather have my cpu 100% stable. i ve had my cpu error in prime in 18hrs at slightly less voltage then what i am at right now, and that is why i also test for 24hrs. its much more safe to have your cpu stress tested to verify its stability, just in case you are doing something extremely important like a report, and the cpu decides to do whatever, then you would be pretty ticked off. thats just my take.

QFT.