Is my Conroe dying? *updated*

[Arkaign]

Errr...

I really thought the e6300 and e6600 were 65nm and I've oc'd both past 4 ghz on air - even one with a shit cooler. (the e6300)

And I checked .. those C2D were indeed Conroe's.

So I'm yet to find a Conroe C2D that won't do 4ghz (the e6600 reached it easily w/ 1.45 vcore more or less, got a lot of drop on that cheap asus board (set to 1.575 or 1.6 I don't remember) and supposedly the P55 is shit at OC but w/e)

Oh and, the temps on that E6600 are just fine .. doesn't get past 70°C on prime95. (I've got to check, because since my cardboard ghetto 170mm fanmod (shit case fan from thermaltake who said it was a 200mm the bastards) - I think the temps changed a bit.

Also I just checked those 45nm you were talking about, my brother got one of these and it went to 4.5ghz easy on air .. don't know where you get your numbers tbh.

Built many many dozens of them, overclocked about half of them either by request or for testing, using a variety of mobos. S775 chipsets got dramatically better as time went on, early P965 boards weren't so hot at overclocking.

If you check the forums here, and look at the posts of the prime 65nm C2D era (2006-2007), you'll see very_very_VERY few C2D @ 4ghz or above, and I don't know of any personally that would do it on a stock cooler. Some of the steppings were better than others, but as a rule mid to high 3ghz was the usual high ground for most original E6300/6400/6600/6700/etc). Frequently, the mobo FSB limit was the problem, depending on multiplier and stock bus speed. Almost anyone beyond 3.4ghz had to use much improved air cooling.

Getting new 45nm E6600 to 4ghz is cake :

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=42807

Getting old 65nm E6600 to 4ghz was .. unusual.

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?spec=SL9S8

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2097&page=4

^^ 3.4Ghz wall

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=106321

^^ Many enthusiasts with crazy good cooling, a few 4ghz, but all of them over 1.6v core

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/core2duo_e6600/12.html

^^ 3.4ghz wall on air

 

[LucJoe]

Just an update: I'm rock solid stable at 3.6 with 1.475 vcore (supposedly up to 1.5 is within spec). Temps under load get up to a max of around 56C which is lower than idle non-overclocked temp before.

It's amazing what a $30 hsf can do...

 

[taltamir]

Just an update: I'm rock solid stable at 3.6 with 1.475 vcore (supposedly up to 1.5 is within spec). Temps under load get up to a max of around 56C which is lower than idle non-overclocked temp before.

Congrats on solving the issue.

It's amazing what a $30 hsf can do...

it sure is

 

[tweakboy]

Temperature measurement offset! Why didn't you say so...

there is absolutely nothing the user needs to do with the RAW data coming off of the CPU's built in power sensor in regards to offset the values in order to get the real ones. Any recording software knows to do that automatically.

The reason there is even an offset is because CPUs do not report their current temperature, they report how many degrees they are below their max safe operational level. So, Core2, Nehalem, and Phenom2 each have a different "max temperature" and thus would need a different mathematical formula (a simple subtraction) to get the temperature from the value reported by the CPU...

Now, an "offset" is only ever needed when a new CPU family is just released and software has not been updated to detect them and use a correct formula, the latest formula for that company would be used instead which would make the reported value probably incorrect. Sometimes there are differences even within a family, for example some core2 chips meant for mobile have a lower TJMax value. If you are using a processor whose TJMax is 95 C and measuring the temp with software that was thinks it has a TJMax of 105C, then the reported temp will be 10 degrees higher then the actual measured temp.
New architectures are rapidly and easily added to measuring software as soon as they become available; and the program you are using (core temp 0.99.8) correctly detected the values for your processor and is displaying the true temperature.

So, bottom line there is absolutely nothing you, the user, need to do about it.

Beautifully written. bravo!

 

[Morg.]

Built many many dozens of them, overclocked about half of them either by request or for testing, using a variety of mobos. S775 chipsets got dramatically better as time went on, early P965 boards weren't so hot at overclocking.

If you check the forums here, and look at the posts of the prime 65nm C2D era (2006-2007), you'll see very_very_VERY few C2D @ 4ghz or above, and I don't know of any personally that would do it on a stock cooler. Some of the steppings were better than others, but as a rule mid to high 3ghz was the usual high ground for most original E6300/6400/6600/6700/etc). Frequently, the mobo FSB limit was the problem, depending on multiplier and stock bus speed. Almost anyone beyond 3.4ghz had to use much improved air cooling.

Getting new 45nm E6600 to 4ghz is cake :

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=42807

Getting old 65nm E6600 to 4ghz was .. unusual.

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?spec=SL9S8

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2097&page=4

^^ 3.4Ghz wall

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=106321

^^ Many enthusiasts with crazy good cooling, a few 4ghz, but all of them over 1.6v core

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/core2duo_e6600/12.html

^^ 3.4ghz wall on air

Well I must say I'm surprised ... my brother had 3.6ghz on his e6300(conroe) prime stable and all on air (that zerotherm fz120 was a damn good bargain @ 20 bucks).

And I checked, mine was an e6750(conroe) (didn't know that tbh) and its 4ghz prime stable on air 70°C max temp with 1.49V (says everest).

I really thought it was the standard, as even my Conroe could've gone a bit further if the RAM (ddr2-800 spec, ran fine @ 960mhz on 2.1V) followed. (also the P55 was marked as a bad chipset for OC'ing)

Also for the wolfsdales, my bro had a soft OC @ 4.5 Ghz on air (e6300) and I thought that was sort of an easy OC too (like you can often get close to 5ghz).

Guess I always was on the lucky (or pushy) side with those things

 

[betasub]

Built many many dozens of them, overclocked about half of them either by request or for testing, using a variety of mobos. S775 chipsets got dramatically better as time went on, early P965 boards weren't so hot at overclocking.

If you check the forums here, and look at the posts of the prime 65nm C2D era (2006-2007), you'll see very_very_VERY few C2D @ 4ghz or above, and I don't know of any personally that would do it on a stock cooler. Some of the steppings were better than others, but as a rule mid to high 3ghz was the usual high ground for most original E6300/6400/6600/6700/etc). Frequently, the mobo FSB limit was the problem, depending on multiplier and stock bus speed. Almost anyone beyond 3.4ghz had to use much improved air cooling.

My experience is very much in agreement with Arkaign. The original Conroe C2D E6300 and E6600 ran into limits quite quickly, particularly because of their low multiplier. Later Conroes such as the E6750 were a different stepping, but still with a low multiplier, requiring a board that could handle FSB>400. Then Intel re-used the E6xxx series names for Wolfdale-based Pentium class processors, which were great overclockers (because of the stock combination of high-multiplier/low-FSB).

 

[taltamir]

I remember, and agree that those CPUs were typically limited by the mobo's FSB due to their low multipliers... but the OP's situation was inadequate cooling, as he was getting thermal throttling. Now that he has good cooling, he might actually hit the mobo's FSB limits

 

[Morg.]

Mine was a cheap Asus p5k-vm .. I didn't know you could get much worse than that

 

[Arkaign]

Mine was a cheap Asus p5k-vm .. I didn't know you could get much worse than that

Heheh, oh yeah, the G3X series was a surprisingly decent overclocker, I remember running an E5200 at pretty good speeds in a Gigabyte G31 model. Things got continually better as time went on. That P5K-VM was G33 iirc, so same gen of chipsets with P35/X38.

A few (very few) 945 chipset boards could run early 65nm C2D chips, but overclocking was usually weak to nonexistent. There was also P965, which was better but not amazing or anything. Also 975, which I think might have actually slightly pre-dated P965 IIRC. Then P35 and X38 hit, and dramatically higher average FSB walls were shown by this mobo, depending still on the chip of course. A lot of boards at this time showed Vdroop though, which I don't think was as common on the eventual P45/X48 chipsets, which were based on 65nm process tech vs. 90nm for P35.

 

[john3850]

Morg
Still have spare c2d e6600 4meg L2 266x9 made at 65mm best that chip could do on 3 different mb with water was 3.8 with 1.48vcore.
The e8400s were the first c2d that could hit 4.0+ easy.
The newer e6600 with 2m L2 oc much better.

 

[Morg.]

Gee more unlucky people .. I guess it makes me feel lucky
I mean .. I had a P55 chipset rated bad for OC'ing, cheap Adata RAM rated cheap (but that actually runs so cool it's totally cool @ 2.1V) and an Conroe e6750 which wasn't supposed to go very high.

Poor you really :x .. didn't you ever get past 1.48 vcore ? I mean mine runs @ 1.5V real (1.575 or 1.6 in bios I don't remember) so I guess lower potential chips might have required a bit more.

 

[Arkaign]

Gee more unlucky people .. I guess it makes me feel lucky
I mean .. I had a P55 chipset rated bad for OC'ing, cheap Adata RAM rated cheap (but that actually runs so cool it's totally cool @ 2.1V) and an Conroe e6750 which wasn't supposed to go very high.

Poor you really :x .. didn't you ever get past 1.48 vcore ? I mean mine runs @ 1.5V real (1.575 or 1.6 in bios I don't remember) so I guess lower potential chips might have required a bit more.

P55 was not a S775 chipset. If you're talking about your P5K-VM, that's a G33 chipset from the same gen as P35/X38, which was actually a pretty solid overclocking chipset, far better than the old P965 and such, where 400mhz fsb was a pipe dream.

Yeah, your results are outside the norm, but not totally off the charts for an E6750 with aftermarket cooling on a decent chipset.

 

[taltamir]

sometimes people get a 1 in a million chip. I had a roomate in college who bought a geforce 8800GTS which overclocked so much it outperformed the 8800Ultra. I had chips that were supposedly great for OC that could OC even 0.5%. OC is not a guaranteed result.

 

[john3850]

Gee more unlucky people .. I guess it makes me feel lucky
I mean .. I had a P55 chipset rated bad for OC'ing, cheap Adata RAM rated cheap (but that actually runs so cool it's totally cool @ 2.1V) and an Conroe e6750 which wasn't supposed to go very high.

Poor you really :x .. didn't you ever get past 1.48 vcore ? I mean mine runs @ 1.5V real (1.575 or 1.6 in bios I don't remember) so I guess lower potential chips might have required a bit more.

The e6600 was the early one Q3-06
The Conroe e6750 was released Q3-07
In one years time the yield always goes up.

 

[betasub]

^ Different stepping too. Experience with E6750 doesn't directly relate to original E6600.

 

[Spikesoldier]

^ Different stepping too. Experience with E6750 doesn't directly relate to original E6600.

yeah, really kinda unfair to compare even though they are both conroe

 

[Raduque]

P55 was not a S775 chipset. If you're talking about your P5K-VM, that's a G33 chipset from the same gen as P35/X38, which was actually a pretty solid overclocking chipset, far better than the old P965 and such, where 400mhz fsb was a pipe dream.

I was running a P965 motherboard at 400mhz FSB daily for ~5 years.

 

[Arkaign]

I was running a P965 motherboard at 400mhz FSB daily for ~5 years.

That's pretty awesome. I got an early one, along with an E6400 (C2D), and even with 1.55v and water it tapped out around 370. Same chip on P35 ran to 428fsb on air I never did have great luck getting P965 boards to overclock to extremes, and the best results seemed to come from the DS3 and DQ6s. I also had more degradation than normal in P35 mobos though, I had several develop massive vdroop over time, usually with overclocked Q6xxx series chips after a couple of years.

 

[Raduque]

That's pretty awesome. I got an early one, along with an E6400 (C2D), and even with 1.55v and water it tapped out around 370. Same chip on P35 ran to 428fsb on air I never did have great luck getting P965 boards to overclock to extremes, and the best results seemed to come from the DS3 and DQ6s. I also had more degradation than normal in P35 mobos though, I had several develop massive vdroop over time, usually with overclocked Q6xxx series chips after a couple of years.

It was a Conroe E6300. I booted it at stock speed just long enough to set the FSB to 400 and it's run at 2.8ghz since. I think over the past 5 years, it's only run at stock 1.86ghz for maybe a couple hours total. The board is a Gigabyte GA-965P-S3.

 

[Markfw]

I was running a P965 motherboard at 400mhz FSB daily for ~5 years.

I had a farm of S3 and DS3 and DQ6 boards, all running a MINIMUM of 400 fsb for years... Last year I parted out everything but one DQ6 that I haven't found a home for yet, but no chip for it to run.

I am pretty sure it was the S3 (P965) that I had 2 E6300's running 500 fsb on, doing 3.5 for years...

Duvie, if you are reading, either correct me or confirm, since we both did this. And one of my boards I got from you.

 

[BD2003]

It was a Conroe E6300. I booted it at stock speed just long enough to set the FSB to 400 and it's run at 2.8ghz since. I think over the past 5 years, it's only run at stock 1.86ghz for maybe a couple hours total. The board is a Gigabyte GA-965P-S3.

I have the exact same setup, been running it for almost 5 years as well. I can run it as high as 3.1ghz, but then my PC wont sleep/resume reliably. At 2.8 ghz (400 FSB), everything works perfectly.

I keep telling myself one day I'm going to upgrade, but old reliable here still feels plenty fast since I added the SSD.