Q6600 Questions Ram and OCing - Page 2

Try lowering the timings to 5-5-5-18 using the 2.66D strap and set the MCH Core voltage to 1.26 or 1.28. And try it with all Ref voltages set to Auto

Try this setting in your BIOS:

*That CPU Term is waaaaay too high. 1.42 is the max I'd ever/have ever run and 1.40 should be more than enough.


MB Intelligent Tweaker(M.I.T.)
Robust Graphics Booster ...............: Auto
CPU Clock Ratio .......................: 9
CPU Frequency .........................: 3.7GHz (400X9)

Clock Chip Control

Standard Clock Control

CPU Host Clock Control.................: [Enabled]
CPU Host Frequency (Mhz) ..............: 412 or 411
PCI Express Frequency (Mhz) ...........: 100
C.I.A.2 ...............................: [Disabled]

Advanced Clock Control

CPU Clock Drive........................: up one notch
PCI Express Clock Drive................: up one notch
CPU Clock Skew (ps)....................: 0ps
MCH Clock Skew (ps)....................: 0ps

DRAM Performance Control

Performance Enhance....................: Standard
Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.)........: Disabled
(G)MCH Frequency Latch.................: 400MHz
System Memory Multiplier ..............: 2.00D
Memory Frequency (Mhz) ................: 800MHz

DRAM Timing Selectable ................:

Standard Timing Control

CAS Latency Time.......................: 5
tRCD ..................................: 5
tRP'...................................: 5
tRAS...................................: 15

Advanced Timing Control

Everything In Advanced Timing Control on auto.

Motherboard Voltage Control

CPU

Load-Line Calibration..................: [Enabled]
CPU Vcore..............................: 1.562V
CPU Termination........................: 1.40V
CPU PLL................................: 1.57V
CPU Reference..........................: this will scale on it's own as shown below

MCH/ICH

MCH Core...............................: 1.26 or try 1.28V
Reference..........................: will scale on it's own
MCH/DRAM Ref...........................: will scale on it's own
ICH I/O................................: 1.1V
ICH Core...............................: 1.100V

DRAM
DRAM Voltage...........................: 1.92V
DRAM Termination ......................: will scale
Channel A Reference....................: will scale
Channel B Reference ...................: will scale

Here is how you will set all of the refs to scale automatically:

Print this ^ if you can to have it to look at then follow these steps.

1) Enter BIOS MIT (this ^ section) and hit F7--Load Optimized defaults.

2) Hit F10 to Save and Exit

3) Go back in your BIOS and set the above BUT, first set everything Ref to the shown default values--especially the bold.

Like this:
CPU Vcore..............................: 1.235 <-- whatever the default shown is
CPU Termination........................: 1.20 <-- default here too
CPU PLL................................: 1.50V
CPU Reference..........................: 0.76

MCH Core...............................: <-- set to default shown 1.10 I believe
Reference..........................: <-- Set to default shown here and below
MCH/DRAM Ref...........................: 1.0v
ICH I/O................................: 1.1V
ICH Core...............................: 1.100V

DRAM Voltage...........................: 1.80 or default
DRAM Termination ......................: <-- all defaults here and below
Channel A Reference....................:
Channel B Reference ...................:

4) Now go back and raise the cpu Term to 1.40 and you will notice the CPU Ref goes up to about .884 or something like that.

5) Raise the RAM to 1.90v and you will notice everything RAM/MCH Ref related will automatically adjust itself to match

6) Now set the vcore, PLL and MCH like I have shown at the very top.

This will have your RAM running at ~822 so it should be able to do that, maybe.

Power up and see if it posts/boots.

Pay attention to any posts beeps if any errors happen, this can tell you where you need to tweak first. Confusing as hell at first, I know, but it's better not to leave things on automatic when possible.

Post back what happens.
Edited by crashdummy35 - 6/28/12 at 4:59pm

That's strange. But I don't have any experience with gskill 800mhz ram so idk what's normal. Mine was PNY.
You might need to grab a used set of 1066 ram if nothing else works. It should only set you back $30-$40 for a 2x2GB set.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2
Edited by clark_b - 6/28/12 at 10:31pm

1) How did it fail? What happened? Did it go into a 3 start-up cycle and fail to post (beep once) or did it crash/hang in Windows?


CPU Host Clock Control.................: [Enabled]
CPU Host Frequency (Mhz) ..............: 412
PCI Express Frequency (Mhz) ...........: 100
C.I.A.2 ...............................: [Disabled]

Load Line Calibration: Enabled
CPU Vcore..............................: 1.562
CPU Termination........................: 1.40
CPU PLL................................: 1.57
CPU Reference..........................: 0.886


CPU Clock Drive........................: 800mv
PCI Express Clock Drive................: 900mv
CPU Clock Skew (ps)....................: 0ps
MCH Clock Skew (ps)....................: 0ps


Try this ^ with 400 MCH Latch and the 2.00D divider. Set your RAM again to 1.92v.

Describe what happens when you try and boot.
Edited by crashdummy35 - 6/29/12 at 12:05am

This. My Q6600 at 3.8 Ghz regularly was the bottleneck when paired w/a 460 GTXs SLI setup. The most noticeable issue was with minimum framerates... by far.

A 3820 @ stock (3.6/3.8 turbo) is roughly 2.5x more powerful than a 3.8 Ghz Q6600 on an nforce board. If you can get more out of your CPU... go for it.

However... I'm concerned w/you stating you need 1.52 vcore after vdroop. That means your vcore is spiking up on a hot cpu right as you unload it. I'd recommend getting a better cooler... then doing a mod to eliminate your vdroop altogether. Or... well... upgrading to something newer when the upgrade bug bites. I held onto my Q6600 until a few months ago. I always saw people say the difference was "Night and Day". I figured that was some BS statement. *** does "Night and Day" mean!? Well... the difference between the two is getting you're moneys worth out of your GPUs and not having the games framerates drop off, causing gameplay to not be smooth. It's a *very* percievable difference in playing games. The more power GPU setup, the more percievable this is. 460 GTX SLI is comparable to a single 580 GTX at resolutions at/under 1080 an a balls-to-the-walls OC on a Q6600 really struggled in some games. Many games were still GPU bound. It really just depends what you're playing.

I would recommend *not* beating on your ram too much. DDR2 is very expensive now-a-days and the benefit of OCing it is negligable most gaming. Ram doesn't like a lot of extra voltage and it would suck to have to replace something that is obsolete to where it can't be used in a new build. You can loosen timings and try to raise their frequency... but be gentle. CPU/GPU is going to make the difference.

Unfortunately these are the only relevant things to be taken from this post. Because:
1. You only have a single GTX460
2. DDR2 ram isn't really that expensive if you buy used, which you should
3. Jumping from 800MHz to 1066MHz does make a significant difference in many games

1. Yep. Just wanted to give a perspective on something that is still a viable upgrade path to an aging system. If 460 GTX SLI is the same (or better) as a 580 GTX, then a 670/680 would really not be utilized to their full potential.
2. Buy old... used ram at your own risk. It's years old and you have no idea how much volts folks have put through it. I wouldn't do it w/o some sort of guarentee it'll pass memtest. Even used, it still commands a relatively high price compared to denser/faster DDR3. It's a dead end for a future upgrade.
3. There are reviews way back when for 780i vs 790i... DDR2 vs DDR3. There difference in gaming is negligable.In some cases, when using SLI... there was an advantage... depending on games.Sometimes worse, depending on the high latencies upon its release. He's not using SLI. DDR2 800 vs 1066 would be much less of a difference. You're going to have to loosen your timings in the process. This was all touted years ago w/proof forever wandeingr around yon internet. From DDR2 800 vs 1066 to the 1333 vs 1600 vs 1866 vs 2133 DDR3. For gaming? Meh. CPU and GPU. If you can't unsync your ram, then there's where your faster ram has an advantage to reach a higher CPU clock. There's where you want to put a lot into loosening timing to get your ram to stay stable at higher speeds.

It's your stuff, bud. I just would hate to risk damaging legacy hardware that you'll have to pay a premium to replace and not be able to carry over to a new build. It's your stuff. Your choice... my .02.

Also... for some of the games you put up... GTA4 specifically from experience... the faster the cpu, the better you'll be. I could never get really great framerates (ie 60 stable). CPU was maxed and churning heat while the GPUs were barely working. For Skyrim, even w/a mid-range card, you'll gain better minimum framerates. Heck, playing zombies MP on CoD BOs, I got better framerates between my 3.0 profile and my 3.8 profile... which was kind'a sad. I played STO when it went F2P and I saw a big jump between 3.0 and 3.8 ghz. It's the only MMo I ever played, so I don't know if WoW is CPU dependent or not.

Enjoy the Q6600. I had one for 4 years... it's really a great CPU. I could boot and tool around at 4.0 Ghz but my cooling was totally inadequate for to keep in < 80C. The nforce board sucked for pulling good gflops on it too.At 3.8 Ghz I was ~ 33 or so. i3 2120s can keep pace w/em at times... but it just goes to show how good the a couple E6600s stuck together could be.I can old hope the rig I have now has the legs.

Be warned, Intels max/absolute max was 1.5/1.55v on that chip. That being said, I've played around north of 1.6v for a few hours here and there w/o any obvious ill effects when trying to go past 4.0 Ghz.. I wouldn't pull a 24/7 clock much over 1.5v if you want it to hang... even as roubust as the 65nm quads were.

What some others have said. You won't benefit much from a faster clock on that Q6600 with a single GTX 460.

That 6600 is still a very viable CPU. A lot of people don't realize that while they're no match for a Sandy Bridge or an Ivy Bridge, Core 2 Quads pretty much keep pace with AMD's Phenom II's that people still buy and happily use right now. If you did want to upgrade, there are a lot of people who still want them to step up from a C2D and keep their old rig humming along. I've salvaged a few and resold them, and I have no problem with using a C2Q myself, even now.