Is this bad for my CPU? PLEASE HELLLPPP!!

[hunter45]

hey guys,

need some help. System specs:

Intel Core i7 2600K @ 3.4GHz on stock hsf/cooler. No overclock
4GB Kingston HyperX RAM @ 1.6GHz
320GB WD HDD
620W Corsair PSU
Gigabyte geforce GTX 460 1GB
Gigabyte P67A-UD3-B3 mobo F4 bios

Well, my temps were reading about 37 degrees on average. (I have a crap cramped case with 1 intake 80mm fan on the side and 1 exhaust 80mm fan on the back). So i read somewhere that you could take down the Vcore to reduce the temp.
I reduced the Vcore from 1.220V to 1.140V and system ran 100% stable and passed 1 hr of Prime95 and passed Intel BurnIn test with success.

Is reducing the Vcore from 1.220V to 1.140V good for my cpu or is it causing damage keeping in mind that prime95 ran flawlessly and so did Intel BurnIn test?
And also, after i took down the Vcore to 1.140V, the idle temp has dropped down to 33 degrees and is now sitting on the following temps in Prime95:

Core0: 64 degrees
Core1: 68 degrees
Core2: 66 degrees
Core3: 62 degrees

Keep in mind the above temps are WITH the Vcore down to 1.140V and with the crap case and fans and Stock HSF/Cooler.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

What are you using to measure temperatures, and what are they at load?

37 degrees idle seems normal, but doesn't tell much; it's how hot your CPU is at load that is more important. As for lowering Vcore, as long as your CPU is still stable it can only do good.

 

[hunter45]

What are you using to measure temperatures, and what are they at load?

37 degrees idle seems normal, but doesn't tell much; it's how hot your CPU is at load that is more important. As for lowering Vcore, as long as your CPU is still stable it can only do good.

Thanks for your quick reply.

I am using CoreTemp and RealTemp and both tell the same temps on all cores. On prime95 my temps are as follows:

Core0: 66 degrees
Core1: 68 degrees
Core2: 64 degrees
Core3: 62 degrees

(The temps never go higher then that)

 

[OCGuy]

Those temps are completely fine.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

They're fine. You have another 15-20C headroom at least.

 

[Soulkeeper]

no intake fan on the front ?

 

[Tuna-Fish]

Lowering Vcore always increases the lifespan of the CPU. It's just that if it goes too low the system won't remain stable.

 

[DirkGently1]

With those temps there's no reason not to leave vcore on default and push the speed up a bit. prime95 is going to create hotter cores than you'll ever get under normal usage so ramp the speed up, at least until you start seeing 75 under prime load.

 

[Borealis7]

if you got a K processor, invest a few extra dollars and get a nice cooler for you CPU. otherwise you wont get far with overclocking.

 

[sm625]

I wonder if the thing is really running at 1.14v when it is turboing...

 

[tnt3k]

those temps are fine. before you dropped the vcore. undervolting isn't probably good. Use intelburntest to get your max temps. its usually even higher than prime.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

those temps are fine. before you dropped the vcore. undervolting isn't probably good. Use intelburntest to get your max temps. its usually even higher than prime.

Why? Undervolting reduces temperatures, and increases the life of the proc. The only potential problem is if it's undervolted to the point where it can't stay stable at a particular speed.

 

[gramboh]

Curious, why buy a 2600K and overclocking mobo and run it in a case with 2x 80mm fans? Spend a few more bucks (won't even cost $100) on a case with room and a bunch of decent 120mm fans.

 

[Seero]

hey guys,

need some help. System specs:

Intel Core i7 2600K @ 3.4GHz on stock hsf/cooler. No overclock
4GB Kingston HyperX RAM @ 1.6GHz
320GB WD HDD
620W Corsair PSU
Gigabyte geforce GTX 460 1GB
Gigabyte P67A-UD3-B3 mobo F4 bios

Well, my temps were reading about 37 degrees on average. (I have a crap cramped case with 1 intake 80mm fan on the side and 1 exhaust 80mm fan on the back). So i read somewhere that you could take down the Vcore to reduce the temp.
I reduced the Vcore from 1.220V to 1.140V and system ran 100% stable and passed 1 hr of Prime95 and passed Intel BurnIn test with success.

Is reducing the Vcore from 1.220V to 1.140V good for my cpu or is it causing damage keeping in mind that prime95 ran flawlessly and so did Intel BurnIn test?
And also, after i took down the Vcore to 1.140V, the idle temp has dropped down to 33 degrees and is now sitting on the following temps in Prime95:

Core0: 64 degrees
Core1: 68 degrees
Core2: 66 degrees
Core3: 62 degrees

Keep in mind the above temps are WITH the Vcore down to 1.140V and with the crap case and fans and Stock HSF/Cooler.

>30c headroom. Don't worry. Don't expect stock hs will do a lot.

 

[hunter45]

Curious, why buy a 2600K and overclocking mobo and run it in a case with 2x 80mm fans? Spend a few more bucks (won't even cost $100) on a case with room and a bunch of decent 120mm fans.

yeah i know. But here in NZ a decent case like Antec 300 is about $150. So i am going to order 2X 120mm fans from ebay and mount the existing 80mm fans also. Gonna get busy with my drill soon

 

[hunter45]

no intake fan on the front ?

Nope, theres no room to install one

 

[hunter45]

With those temps there's no reason not to leave vcore on default and push the speed up a bit. prime95 is going to create hotter cores than you'll ever get under normal usage so ramp the speed up, at least until you start seeing 75 under prime load.

I am going to crank it to 3.7 ghz right now at the same vcore and see if it remains stable.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

yeah i know. But here in NZ a decent case like Antec 300 is about $150. So i am going to order 2X 120mm fans from ebay and mount the existing 80mm fans also. Gonna get busy with my drill soon

http://pricespy.co.nz/product.php?p=294113

Also, even if it were, your argument would make no sense, because you just spent $450-550 on a CPU designed to be overclocked, and stuck it in a case where you could not possibly get the most out of it.

While you're at it, getting a new cooler would help too.

 

[hunter45]

http://pricespy.co.nz/product.php?p=294113

Also, even if it were, your argument would make no sense, because you just spent $450-550 on a CPU designed to be overclocked, and stuck it in a case where you could not possibly get the most out of it.

While you're at it, getting a new cooler would help too.

:O thanks for referring me to that. Well I happen to have spent most of my budget already by upgrading. I bought the i7 because i like the name
"I have an i7"

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

So...is there any actual reason you bought the K processor rather than the normal, locked one? Is there any reason you bought a 2600 at all, other than to brag about it?

 

[hunter45]

So...is there any actual reason you bought the K processor rather than the normal, locked one? Is there any reason you bought a 2600 at all, other than to brag about it?

So that i can OC it obviously. I will be getting a cooler master hyper 212 as soon as i have the cash. Am going to order some 120mm fans for the time being.

 

[hunter45]

Just OC'd it on 1.140 Vcore to 3.7Ghz. Ran intel burnIn test and it passed. highest core temp was 70 degrees.
Core 0 was around 68, core 1 about 69 or 70, core 2 about 68, core 3 was 66.

is that good?

 

[RoyG]

No worry. My QX9650 has been running for years with Vcore only 1.075v in BIOS. CPU fan is off now. Super quite.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Just OC'd it on 1.140 Vcore to 3.7Ghz. Ran intel burnIn test and it passed. highest core temp was 70 degrees.
Core 0 was around 68, core 1 about 69 or 70, core 2 about 68, core 3 was 66.

is that good?

Yeah... an extra couple of 100 MHz and an extra few degrees is to be expected.

You should notice it drop with the 120 mm fans and then the better heatsink. Then you should be able to push >4 GHz if you are comfortable.

 

[hunter45]

Yeah... an extra couple of 100 MHz and an extra few degrees is to be expected.

You should notice it drop with the 120 mm fans and then the better heatsink. Then you should be able to push >4 GHz if you are comfortable.

I'll have a go at that after the 120mm fans arrive