Should I be satisfied with this overclock? With poll.

[The Sauce]

Brand new E6600 running on a P5B. This isn't a "how do I overclock this chip further" thread, this is a "should I sell this chip and try again" question. I am confident in my overclocking knowledge and ability. I have tried 2 different motherboards (DS3 and P5B-D) and the result is equivalent on both. Based on what I have heard this is just an abysmally poor overclock. I have no problem selling this chip for a loss and trying again if the concensus is that this is a poor specimen and I would probably do better with another try. Money is not a major concern.

I guess the other option would be to suck it up for now and wait for 45nm chips to come out and get a 6420 or something like that.

System:
P5B-D
E6600 "F" stepping
Scythe Infinity
Firestix 1GB x 2 Micron D9
8800GTS
Raptor 10K 150gb
Antec Nine Hundred

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Well depends on what you want out of it? If you enjoy spending time benchmarking and posting SuperPI scores etc.. in all the overclockers forums then it may be worth it. But if your main usage of the rig is gaming or productivity then 3.15 is plenty fast and you should keep what you got until your next upgrade.

I'm kind of in the same boat, my E6400 won't go much over 3.2 orthos stable without insane amounts of vcore. Even at 3.2 it takes 1.5v to be completely stable, but I'm gonna keep it because it does what I need to do and if I got another one there is no guarantee it won't be the same or worse. We probably waited too late in the cycle to get great overclockers (got mine about a month ago).

My theory is that the lower speed chips in a family are always better overclockers when they first come out, once a CPU family has been out awhile the prices drop, box builders start selling models with the higher clocked chips(both mean more sales of the higher clocked parts) and the manufacturers start binning chips much more aggressively

 

[The Sauce]

That is one argument. However I have heard people say that the average overclock for a 6600 is around 3.6. Hard for me to swallow a 450 MHz performance deficit over what could reasonably be expected on the average. You know what I mean? I mean I did spend a lot more than what I could have for a 6400 if I was gonna settle for 3.2.

 

[PCTC2]

Well, the 3.6GHz is really for non-F-steppings but 3.15GHz is fine. It is only a 14% performance boost to 3.6GHz from 3.15 so it shouldn't really be too noticable unless this was meant to be a benchmarking machine.
I think you should just keep it and wait for 45nm Quadcore to shell out more money.

 

[slappynutz]

I have an E6600 running on an Intel D975XBX2 and it's completely stable at 3.24ghz (360 FSB) on stock vCore, vMCH and cFSB settings. My OCZ PC6400 Plat R2 ram (4x1gb) are running the stock 4-4-4-15 at 1.92v on the default 1066 strap. Coretemps idle under 30c and the only thing really generating heat is the 8800GTX. It's rock solid and quiet, but fails at 370fsb without increasing the vCore. Using a Scythe Ninja in an Antec P180.

Bumped the vCore up to 1.4000 in the bios last night (1.35 reported in Windows with vdroop) and was stable at 370fsb, while OCCT errored at 380fsb. Pretty sure I could get to 3.6ghz with a little work. Coretemps jumped about 4c with the vCore increase. Not sure if I'm going to bother as 3.24ghz at stock volts vs 3.6 at 1.45v+ isn't too big a jump in performance. I have an LCD monitor and game with vSync on anyway. Maybe I'll overclock my system further in a year or two when I'll actually be able to tell the difference.

I just have the same bug you do ... want to get the max performance, even if it doesn't really matter. I'm not a great overclocker by any stretch, but you do seem to have a poor E6600. If it bothers you, switch it out. I've heard the F stepping chips are bad overclockers ... guess you just lost the E6600 lottery.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

1. Usually the people with the best overclocks post their results
2. Many people stretch the truth to make themselves look better
3. Many people claim overclocks that are nowhere close to 24/7 stable
4. Anyone who claims to know what the "average" overclock for a particular chip is full of crap, no way they have enough verified data to make that claim

To me a better way to look at it is, at 3.2ghz you got 800mhz more than what Intel gauranteed and the 4mb cache. Much better than trying to compare to the bloated numbers that the e-penis waving boys claim to get and being disappointed. Hell crank the vcore up to 1.7 just long enough to get a validated CPU-z suicide screenie at 3.8 and post in your sig if it makes you feel better thats what most do

 

[The Sauce]

I'm not about the benchmarking at all. My main concern is gaming. If this CPU will not bottleneck my 8800 GTS at it's current speed then I guess I don't really care that much. I just always feel jipped when everyone else is hitting 3.6 and I'm stuck at 3.15. It really wouldn't bother me much to sell it for a $20 loss and reorder if I was fairly certain to do better. $20 is about 10 minutes work for me.

The crazy thing about this "f" stepping is that temps are rediculously low. Right now running Orthos at 1.5V with the vDroop mod and at max speed for this chip my peak temps are 47C load. You would think that it has a bit more juice in it based on that but no.

 

[gramboh]

3.6GHz is high for E6600 from what I've seen, I'd call 3.2 average. I'd call below 3 a bit 'disappointing' but then again it's all free performance (other than the cost of high quality components to drive the OC).

Pretty sure you aren't bottlenecking the 8800 at 3.15, but maybe check some benchmarks. If it truly will only cost $20 (remember listing and shipping and paypal fees if you are eBaying) and you like to tweak, why not get another and test it, then sell whichever is lower performing, that's the fun of it right?

 

[The Sauce]

Yah I have considered that. That's exactly what I did with my Opty 165. Bought two of those and a 170 before I settled on the best one. I'm not really sure how well this will sell. Usually people snap them up right away if you give a discount... like if I were to sell this for $290. Ya think?

 

[CurseTheSky]

Heh, even my 3.42GHz overclock finally became unstable. I backed it down to 3.15 (at 1.375 volts), because I'm doing more and more crash-sensitive work on my computer.

3.6GHz isn't impossible, but it's definately something to be proud of. Most of the people I've talked to running at 3.4+ GHz on their 6600's are running mid to high 40s for idle temps, or using some hefty cooling.

 

[3LEMENT0]

I'd sell it and try on a different chip. If my 4300 didn't hit 3 Ghz easy I'd have sold it and gotten a 6400.That's just me.
Good Luck

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: Snatchface
I'm not about the benchmarking at all. My main concern is gaming. If this CPU will not bottleneck my 8800 GTS at it's current speed then I guess I don't really care that much.

What monitor are you using? What settings do you prefer to game at (resolution/AA/AF/etc)? What games do you play?

 

[The Sauce]

I play pong mostly on a 13" B&W crt. Requires a pretty hardcore video system.

 

[PCTC2]

DOPE CHOICE ON THE GAME. Pong is the only way to go on the B/W CRT. hahaha.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
1. Usually the people with the best overclocks post their results
2. Many people stretch the truth to make themselves look better
3. Many people claim overclocks that are nowhere close to 24/7 stable
4. Anyone who claims to know what the "average" overclock for a particular chip is full of crap, no way they have enough verified data to make that claim

To me a better way to look at it is, at 3.2ghz you got 800mhz more than what Intel gauranteed and the 4mb cache. Much better than trying to compare to the bloated numbers that the e-penis waving boys claim to get and being disappointed. Hell crank the vcore up to 1.7 just long enough to get a validated CPU-z suicide screenie at 3.8 and post in your sig if it makes you feel better thats what most do

you DO know this is HERESY in the O/C'ing forum
:Q

stop making any sense

a "real" o/c'er is NEVER satisfied

... so IGNORE me and sell that 6600 and try again
[i'm a wussie that actually was actually satisfied with my 2.80c at 3.31Ghz and i *won't* massively overvolt my P4 3.4EE with an exotic cooler to got from 3.7 to 3.8Ghz]

you might actually get an extra FPS--or two - in a real game ... but you will have an *awesome* 3DmarkXX score and an e-penis for everyone else to admire

 

[The Sauce]

Well I was seriously thinking about selling it and rebuying but now that I read all the threads about drops in prices I think I might just wait and upgrade to something better later.

 

[T101]

Well, 3.15 Ghz at 1.5V is not so much about the speed. But rather the problem of increased VCore. I run my E6600 @ 3.0 Ghz stock voltage (granted, each CPU is different). Were I you, I would be happy with the speed, but I would try to see how much I could lower the VCore, in order to try to reach default VCore, if possible. Since ti will make the chip run cooler and live longer.

 

[n7]

Eh, 3.15GHz isn't great, but i'd say that claiming 3.6 GHz is average is pushing it.

Also, i wanted to mention that my F stepping also ran very cool, whereas my B one runs insanely hot.

Kinda annoying actually, since now that i've gone back to my TT BT i can't go very high w/ vcore due to temps...

 

[mercanucaribe]

When you people overclock, do you make sure it's not returning errors with Prime95?

 

[T101]

I use Orthos, since it loads both cores at once (compared to running just one instance of Prime95, yes I know you can run two as well).

How do I actually know what stepping (b or f, etc.) my CPU info relates to? CPU-Z says; Stepping 6, Revision B2, Model F, is it model that you are talking about? because stepping I have not seen given as anything but a number.

 

[PCTC2]

Look either on the box or on the IHS itself on the CPU. it shoudl have a number like "L632B739" the B is the stepping code, and the 2 numbers before hand is the week number. That's all i really know about that.