Overclocking an AM2

[Elcs]

Ok, so I got my AMD X2 6000+ and Im pleased with the performance.

In my old Socket A, T'Bred B DLT3C JIUHB 1700+ and Mobile Barton 2500+ days, I used to keep my processor at around stock speed, drop the multiplier but increasing the FSB to get more out of my RAM and slightly more performance at the same voltage/heat output.

I am looking to do similar with my new X2 6000+. I am running 4 gigs of PC2-6400 OCZ stuff on an MSI K9N Neo V3 and it offers what seem to be comprehensive overclocking options in the BIOS which I am going to assume is still the preferred method of overclocking.

My Seasonic S12 600W holds my voltages very steady and the system, despite being on Vista is rock solid. I am running on the stock heatsink as I cannot currently afford anything aftermarket hence why I do not wish to go for a "proper" overclock.

Can anyone provide me with any advice or help?

 

[stevty2889]

There is an excellent guide right here it was made during the socket 939 days, but still holds true for AM2 as well. My old X2 4200+ has been running a 400mhz overclock for almost 2 years on the stock AMD heatsink, so you may have more headroom than you think.

 

[o1die]

I recommend against overclocking the 6000. It's already running at 3.0, and may run a bit warm with the stock heatsink. About once a week, I see a new post from someone who questions why his overclocked system is suddenly failing without warning; some can be set back to default settings, and some can't. If you want to keep your system awhile and you're not rich, don't do it.

 

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: o1die
I recommend against overclocking the 6000. It's already running at 3.0, and may run a bit warm with the stock heatsink. About once a week, I see a new post from someone who questions why his overclocked system is suddenly failing without warning; some can be set back to default settings, and some can't. If you want to keep your system awhile and you're not rich, don't do it.

I am not looking at breaking temperatures and making it sweat. I am also looking at keeping it to around 3.0/3.1ghz and at stock or lower voltage.

Would you still advise against this?

 

[j0j081]

Originally posted by: Elcs

Originally posted by: o1die
I recommend against overclocking the 6000. It's already running at 3.0, and may run a bit warm with the stock heatsink. About once a week, I see a new post from someone who questions why his overclocked system is suddenly failing without warning; some can be set back to default settings, and some can't. If you want to keep your system awhile and you're not rich, don't do it.

I am not looking at breaking temperatures and making it sweat. I am also looking at keeping it to around 3.0/3.1ghz and at stock or lower voltage.

Would you still advise against this?

I think it must have a little headroom from reading some of the reviews on newegg.

 

[o1die]

Well, give it a shot. I was thinking more of the 6400, which runs at 125 watts. The 6000 uses only 89 watts.

 

[j0j081]

Originally posted by: o1die
Well, give it a shot. I was thinking more of the 6400, which runs at 125 watts. The 6000 uses only 89 watts.

so based on that would u say the 6000+ is a better buy than the 6400+ which doesn't even include a cooler. you'd only have to oc the 6000+ 200 mhz to match it right or is something else different?

 

[Bacstar]

I have my 6000+ running now at 3.25 ghz on default voltages for about a week, and it's been pretty stable. I've been bumping up the speeds every few days, and whenever i start having issues I'll probably leave it at the prior settings. i don't want to mess with voltages too much. However, I did upgrade my cpu cooler to a Zalman CPS9700. It idles anywhere from 32-38 C at idle and 44-50 C at full load depending on how warm i keep my room.

 

[j0j081]

yeah I'm not seeing any real advantages to the 6400+ then to make it worth the extra 20 bucks plus the price of a cooler. if you are going to pay that much you might as well get the e6750 which beats the 6000+. the 6000+ is such a good deal because it currently is a better bang for the buck (stock) than Intel in that price range.