Project: Conroe Burnout

lordbeanlordbean Ontario, Canada
edited July 2009 in Hardware
I have an older Conroe E6600 lying around, so I decided to slap it in my rig and go for maximum clock speed. I've heard the E6600 had great overclocking potential, but never had a good board to try it on back when I used it... since my current one can hit upwards of 500MHz FSB and the conroe's stock is 266, I should be able to drive it right to the limit.

Should be interesting to see what I can achieve with it. Particularly if I can beat my Q9450's highest stable clock speed of about 3.7GHz.

Comments

  • Nate_LapTNate_LapT Ferndale MI. Icrontian
    edited July 2009
    just keep an eye on temps. and aim that AC duct into your pc keep that beast cool

    http://www.arsgeek.com/2008/02/11/ac-cooled-pc/
    Heh, I like comment #1
  • lordbeanlordbean Ontario, Canada
    edited July 2009
    Got some results at this point...

    It can't beat my Q9450's record. One of the cores seems to be sensitive... in prime95 testing, core 1 always dies long before core 2. I got it to run stable at 3.3ghz, but it's taking 1.55vcore to keep it steady. CPU's lifespan is definitely limited at that setting.
  • lordbeanlordbean Ontario, Canada
    edited July 2009
    Final Settings:

    FSB @ 466MHz
    CPU @ 3262MHz using x7 multiplier, 1.55vid (1.5v idle, 1.48v load)
    RAM 1:1 @ DDR933 5-5-5-18 2.1v

    I'm gonna run my PC like this until either the CPU burns out or I replace it with a core i5. A two-core version of the i7 is EXACTLY what I was waiting for in terms of upgrading. Drop $150-200 on a cheaper i7 and overclock the hell out of it.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited July 2009
    You won't burn it out. I've been running an E6420 -- most likely the same year/month of production -- at 3500MHz (500*7 @ 1.475v) for nearly 3 years.
  • lordbeanlordbean Ontario, Canada
    edited July 2009
    Hah, nice. Little thing may be a trooper then. If only core 1 ran as stable as core 2 does, I could probably get close to 4ghz.

    Ah well. I still prefer it to my quad, anyway. 3.26ghz is fast enough that I don't really lose much graphics performance, if any, against the 3.6ghz-clocked quad. Fallout 3 appears to be much more stable on the dual core CPU, as well - which is currently a compelling argument for me.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited July 2009
    Many of the Core 2 Duos of this generation have a 500 - 503MHz FSB wall. You'd probably never crack 4Ghz. It's been a constant source of frustration for me for years.
  • MAGICMAGIC Doot Doot Furniture City, Michigan Icrontian
    edited July 2009
    My e8200 gets stuck at 502x6 1.35v, so i just keep it at 500.
  • lordbeanlordbean Ontario, Canada
    edited July 2009
    503x9 would theoretically be 4.5 ghz, but I can't get it to post successfully much above the speed it's at now. I'm RAM limited to 466 since 933 seems to be the highest stable speed my OCZ DDR2-1000 will run.
Sign In or Register to comment.