[GamingDaemon]

Hi Everyone,

I just installed installed a Q9400 into my DFI Lanparty DK P35 T2RS mobo, and added a Xigmatek HDT cooler (with MX-2 thermal compound).

I can get to 3.2GHz no problem with ridiculously low temps and not much voltage.

But my goal is 3.6GHz.

So I jumped right to 450FSB (I know, I shouldn't do that). And then slowly increased the voltage. Now I am up to 1.312V for the core volatage (I am using a 333/667 ratio for the memory to keep it at 900MHz at 2.0V).

Is 1.312V too high? Intel says it can go up to 1.3625V, but this still seems high. Should I be adjusting other voltages?

Thanks in advance!

 

[mcogan10]

Up to 1.3625v on your CPU is perfectly safe bro. Good luck. At some point you might have to raise the Northbridge voltage, but it doesn't seem like you need to at this point.

 

[dralb]

Thats fine. Keep in mind, the vcore set in BIOS is a high mark. With standard vdroop, the vcore delivered to the CPU is a bit lower. So, even if you set the vcore in the BIOS to run the CPU at 1.3625v, chances are the CPU would still be running under the max recommended vcore as per Intel.

 

[xxicrimsonixx]

1.36250 is fine to go up to, as long as the temps are fine, many people say that the max safest is actually 1.4v (wouldnt be unrealistic, because Intel would probably lower the max safe volts, so you have a guideline, and not to go extremely high). 1.4v should be the absolute maximum, but i think that you should be able to reach 3.6g with like a max of 1.35v? that should hopefully get you there.

 

[GamingDaemon]

Cool. Thanks guys. My temps under load is high 30s low 40s. And no, my room is not cold. It is actually quite warm.

But cores 2 and 3 never seem to move. I adjusted RealTemp so the TJ Max is 100, but it just seems wierd that they never change. Did I not spread the themral compound enough or something?

 

[weebeast]

Maybe you got stuck temp sensors?You can test your sensors with realtemp

 

[redalert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GamingDaemon Cool. Thanks guys. My temps under load is high 30s low 40s. And no, my room is not cold. It is actually quite warm. But cores 2 and 3 never seem to move. I adjusted RealTemp so the TJ Max is 100, but it just seems wierd that they never change. Did I not spread the themral compound enough or something?

dont adjust the TJ max if you have the newest version of Real temp you dont need to adjust it. Its stuck sensors 2 of mine never go below 37c

 

[uNeec]

Quote:

Originally Posted by redalert dont adjust the TJ max if you have the newest version of Real temp you dont need to adjust it. Its stuck sensors 2 of mine never go below 37c

Me too, my e7200 NEVER goes below 37c but when it's on full load it moves to 42c.

 

[Prong]

I needed 1.375v in bios for vcore which meant 1.34v idle and 1.31v under %100 load in windows after vdroop with LLC disabled. Also needed 1.49v for northbridge and 1.36v for fsb term voltage to get it really stable at 3.6Ghz.

Even I had no problems for nearly a month @3.6Ghz I just reverted back to 3.4Ghz with safer settings. 1.49v seemed just too much for me and I do not have the chance to track nb temp on my Asus P5E3 since it doesn't have a sensor for nb. So I had no idea about nb temp and as far as I knew safe max for nb was 1.45v. I didn't like the idea to run it with a higher voltage than recomended without tracking the nb temp and for now using my q9400 @3.4Ghz for 24/7 use.

Good luck with your oc...

 

[redalert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prong I needed 1.375v in bios for vcore which meant 1.34v idle and 1.31v under %100 load in windows after vdroop with LLC disabled. Also needed 1.49v for northbridge and 1.36v for fsb term voltage to get it really stable at 3.6Ghz. Even I had no problems for nearly a month @3.6Ghz I just reverted back to 3.4Ghz with safer settings. 1.49v seemed just too much for me and I do not have the chance to track nb temp on my Asus P5E3 since it doesn't have a sensor for nb. Even I had no idea about nb temp and as far as I knew safe max for nb was 1.45v I didn't like the idea to run it with a higher voltage than recomended and using my q9400 @3.4Ghz for 24/7 use. Good luck with your oc...

I wonder if you had a P45 or x48 board if you would have better luck overclocking the Q9400

 

[GamingDaemon]

Well, I did adjust the TJ Max to 100 for the cores (it was 90).

The temps now compare properly with what CoreTemp reports.

I ran the RealTemp Sensor Test. Here are the results:

 

[Prong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by redalert I wonder if you had a P45 or x48 board if you would have better luck overclocking the Q9400

Maybe I would with x48. When it comes to P45 a friend of mine with Q9400 and a P45 mobo needs higher voltages even @3.4Ghz. So I don't think P45 would be better luck but maybe x48.

It was/is very stable @3.4Ghz w/1.216v for vcore and 1.29v on nb. This one was another thing that was strange for me. To reach a speed that is only 200mhz more than 3.4Ghz I needed 1.34v for vcore and 1.49v for nb which I thought 1.25/1.26 or something for vcore would do the trick...

If I can have the chance to track my nb temp ( I'l buy a infrared thermometer as soon as possible ) I will again get it to 3.6Ghz and moving up from there maybe I'll try more depending on nb temp...

 

[redalert]

I have to push my voltages alot to get past 460fsb(vcore in bios is 1.33375) unless I enable LLC and the only reason I dont keep it enabled is due to temps. I would need to set vcore to 1.4 bios to get to 3.8 stable damn voltage droop and drop

is the only thing I dont like with my board. My nb voltage has no effect on my overclock only vcore gets me stable.

 

[Prong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GamingDaemon Well, I did adjust the TJ Max to 100 for the cores (it was 90). The temps now compare properly with what CoreTemp reports. I ran the RealTemp Sensor Test. Here are the results:

Not sure but sensor Core 2 seems to be stuck.

 

[Prong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by redalert I have to push my voltages alot to get past 460fsb(vcore in bios is 1.33375) unless I enable LLC and the only reason I dont keep it enabled is due to temps. I would need to set vcore to 1.4 bios to get to 3.8 stable damn voltage droop and drop is the only thing I dont like with my board. My nb voltage has no effect on my overclock only vcore gets me stable.

Temps are the only reason to keep it enabled or disabled ?

I use enabled LLC only to reach the same speed with lower voltage and my temps doesn't seem to be affected by LLC too much at all. For example my Q9400 is very stable with 1.21v underload @3.4Ghz. With LLC enabled I can set my vcore to 1.24v in bios which gives me only 0.03v for vdroop because of enabled LLC. But if I disable LLC vdroop increases to nearly 0.07v and so I need to set vcore to 1.275v in bios to reach the very same speed.

With both choices it needs to have 1.21v under %100 load. But with enabled LLC I have 1.21v both when idle and underload. With disabled LLC I got to have 1.24v idle which is higher than enabled LLC situation and 1.21v underload.

So if lower voltage means less heat why would you not enable LLC unless you are very close to max vcore ?

 

[mothow]

I use about 1.325v on mine to keep it 100% stable at 3.6ghz.So id say as long as your temps are good dont wory about it

 

[GamingDaemon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prong Not sure but sensor Core 2 seems to be stuck.

Is there anything I can do to fix this? It shouldn't have anything to do with how evenly the themral compound was spread, right?

 

[Prong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GamingDaemon Is there anything I can do to fix this? It shouldn't have anything to do with how evenly the themral compound was spread, right?

Are you really willing to see your idle temps ? I would nevermind at all. Important thing is your load temps and it seems to show them to you as temps increases.

 

[redalert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prong Temps are the only reason to keep it enabled or disabled ? I use enabled LLC only to reach the same speed with lower voltage and my temps doesn't seem to be affected by LLC too much at all. For example my Q9400 is very stable with 1.21v underload @3.4Ghz. With LLC enabled I can set my vcore to 1.24v in bios which gives me only 0.03v for vdroop because of enabled LLC. But if I disable LLC vdroop increases to nearly 0.07v and so I need to set vcore to 1.275v in bios to reach the very same speed. With both choices it needs to have 1.21v under %100 load. But with enabled LLC I have 1.21v both when idle and underload. With disabled LLC I got to have 1.24v idle which is higher than enabled LLC situation and 1.21v underload. So if lower voltage means less heat why would you not enable LLC unless you are very close to max vcore ?

I have to keep LLC disabled. If I leave LLC on I can drop the vcore down to 1.33125 in bios and be stable at 3.8 but temps hit the high 70's running Linx and running prime95 blend temps are 67-71 thats with an ambient of 21c. The temps are just to high for me and once summer rolls around the temps would be alot worse.

 

[Prong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by redalert I have to keep LLC disabled. If I leave LLC on I can drop the vcore down to 1.33125 in bios and be stable at 3.8 but temps hit the high 70's running Linx and running prime95 blend temps are 67-71 thats with an ambient of 21c. The temps are just to high for me and once summer rolls around the temps would be alot worse.

I am sure this is the best choice for you. I believe your mobo does not have much vdroop as mine...Every mobo is different and acts different anyways. To make it clear situation about LLC for me is like below...

Enabled LLC :

vcore in bios 1.24v
vcore in windows idle :1.21v
vcore in windows load:1.21v

Disabled LLC :

vcore in bios 1.275v
vcore in windows idle :1.24v
vcore in windows load:1.21v

So as you might see with disabled LLC I have more voltage on vcore when idle than enabled LLC. Which most probably means more heat. So why not enable it and have the same low vcore both idle and underload which most probably means less heat.

That was what I was trying to say but of course this is what situation is like with my P5E3.

Your mobo might act totally different and it does seem to do so...