Mootsfox

First list of this kind. Nice work.

__________________

Important reads for all members
Forum Rules (TOS) | Piracy Policy | Keeping the forum classy

ATI Essentials Thread | Make a Projector < $100!
Ohio Overclocking Organization | State Overclocking List

Nikon D300s - Nikon D1H - Nikon D60 - Nikon F100 - 24-120mm AF - 18-55mm VR - 55-200mm VR
Nikkor 24mm AI f/2.8 - Nikkor 35mm AI f/2.8 - Nikkor 50mm AI f/2.0 - Nikkor-S 50mm f/1.4 - Nikkor 50mm AI f/1.4

NuclearCrap

Thanks. I thought I'd make it so people can refer to it when buying a new CPU. Overclocking is heavily dependent on max FSB and multiplier anyway but Intel is tricking people into buying overpriced chips with low multipliers.

__________________

kazakia

are you sure E6850's are used in Q6600's where did you get that info

Cause if that is true why isn't every Q6600 user getting at least 3.6Ghz?

quite a few E6850 reach 4.0Ghz but quad cores rarely real that speed.

sublime0

Damn Nuke, Must have taken sometime to type all of that. Good info as well. +1

Looks like your good with your hands after all...

NuclearCrap

E6850 isn't really a E6850 you know. When Intel made the G0 revision they didn't bother calling it a E6600 again so they bumped the stock FSB and price and called it a E6850. On the quad side, they left the 6800/6850 name for the Extreme, so they simply refreshed the Q6600s with the G0 revision. What is the difference other than the stock speed? They're both G0 and they both have 9x multiplier.

Also, dual core CPUs always overclock a bit higher than their quad core cousins by nature. Lots of people have hit 3.8GHz on the Q6600 G0. I got my info from my experience with multiple Core 2 CPUs and analyzing the info given at www.intel.com for each chip. To find the multiplier, all you have to do is to divide the stock speed (in MHz) by 1/4 of the stock FSB (in MHz). When they say 1333MHz it's really 1333.3333333......MHz, so is 1066.666666......MHz, so take that into consideration.

E6850 = 3000MHz/(1333MHz/4) = 3000MHz/333MHz = 9x multiplier

__________________

NuclearCrap

Updated with E8600 and E8300. That confirms the Q9550 as dual E8300.

__________________

NuclearCrap

Added E1200, E1400, E7200, and E4700.

__________________

relic2279

So I have a serious hangover here from a meeting/dinner with verizon wireless for work.

But am I understanding this correctly? The lower the multiplier, the easier/higher it will overclock? (not higher as in total Mhz/Ghz,) but percentage wise? Thats what it seems like he's saying... Is this true? Someone correct me please.


~R

__________________

NuclearCrap

The higher the multiplier, the easier it is to overclock. Percentage-wise, the lower multiplier would gain more percentage because it requires more. But I'd much rather have a 3.5GHz E6600 with more headroom than a 3.5GHz E6550 that's been pushed to the max at 500x7.

From my experience with the ten thousand and one Core 2 CPUs I've dealt with, 9x multiplier is the sweet spot. 8x is a just a bit too little and 10x is excessive, although 10x would shine in weaker motherboards (like on a mATX build or something of that sort). Don't even mess with 7x unless you feel like wasting money for fun.

__________________

Gauvenator

lol...I wish I had realized that when I got my e6320 (7x multi ). It still oc's well, but even 1x more would make me sooo happy

__________________
4ghz 71% OC