Xtreme Low Q6600 G0 Temp on Air !!! (Lots of Pics)

[XtremeTiramisu]

I thought VID was supposed to be like the stock voltage.

Mine says 1.2625 in coretemp but I'm using 32bit XP, not sure if that makes a diff.

Okay, so 1.425 didn't work for your 3.6ghz? I'll have to see when I get home.

L723A930



VID say's 1.3, what does that mean?

vcore set in bios about 1.55

To be 3.6 stable vcore was 1.45

Regarding chip's VID:

This is what I've answered in another forum for someone who asked the same questions on VID:
VID is also one thing that we can take into account to determine the chip's overclocking-ability in the later stages. Lower VID almost always means that the overclocking room will be more. Bcos you started off with a lower Vcore at stock clock, your chip may ended up requiring much less volts to acheive the desire clock than another chip that has a higher VID than yours at the same clock. Lower volts required to obtain your desired clock speed may also mean lower temp.

However, keep this in mind though, although I'm stating this all based on facts and statistics but this still doesn't guarantee the OC outcome in every case, just so you know

Told you you'd have better luck with the 9x multi

3.74 GHz on air is nothing short of amazing!

Wonder what it'd do on better cooling...

Gotta say thanks for enlighten me
I totally forgot about the x9 multiplier route as I was so used to x8 multiplier route with my E6700.

If you are still in a room that is in the 25 - 29C ambient range, if I was you I would not trust these temps. Your "system" temp and your "HD0" temp are at or below ambient.

If it was me I would install XP and see if the temp readings stay where they are. I am not trying to say you are cheating, just that maybe the 64 bit OS is not compatible with the temp monitoring proggies. If I am right you may well be burning up your CPU without even knowing it. Of course there is always the 99% chance that I am wrong, in which case...NICE!!!

I still don't trust those temps. Like I said if it was me I would check it out in XP just to be sure. I realize this screenie was taken in morning, but he has others in afternoon with same low HD and system temp.

This post
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...9&postcount=11
says his ambient temps go from 21 - 30++. Even 24C HD and 25C system at 21C ambient is kinda weird. Just hoping he is not burning his chip up due to a temp monitor on 64 bit OS that isn't proper, but maybe I am just paranoid.

OK, here is another explanation I'm going to make again just so you're clear about the core temp reported from Coretemp and Speedfan4.32.

Obviously you've not being reading and following my every single post carefully throughout the 7 pages, and I understand the thread is long but the infos are all there actually.

1. Forget about Vista 32bit or 64bit vs XP OS enviroment for reading the core temp correct, let me tell you simply that the OS isn't not related to the accuracy of the core temp reporting. I think I've answered about the accuracy part to someone in one of the post reply I made from the previous pages. Tjunction - DTS = coretemp and I even had a screen per the demand asking to show the Tjunction remaining from the coretemp just to show that the core temp is actually picking up the 100c Tjunction properly.

2. Pay close attention again to all my screen captures that has Asus AI suite and Speedfan 4.32 in it and look for the time for the screen that was captured. You can see that the system temp varies throughout the day. My room temp is actually 4~5c lower than the system temp reported. Do the calculations yourself and you'll find out my approx ambient temp. It's very similar to any others who also has Asus AI suite + speedfan 4.32 in the screen shots. However everyone's room conditions are different.

And obviously again you've missed the post I've made regarding the relationship btw ambient temp and OC'ed core temps in my previous page. Go dig it up and read it again.

People please don't make me explain things again for something it's already being covered. I have every motivation to show and explain all OC related subjects as clear and legit as possible so I'd hope you call can get it in the first place so no more time will be wasted from both party.

hey XtremeTiramisu is then any way you can show some 3DMark06 benchmark

Of course, this is also one of my primary goal after I'm fully settled on a max stable clock speed : voltage : core temp strictly below Intel thermal spec of 71c on air cooling setup.

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. He should try to get coretemp working.

Obviously you've not being following my posts closely enough and have missed the fact that I even made a post reply to help all others who need to get Coretemp 0.95 to work under Vista x64 OS in the previous pages.

[dinos22]

tiramisu
i agree with you there about "orthos stable" requests

there are two overclocks i have on my systems
one 24/7
the other bench stable OC

[Yakyb]

thanks for the thread it would seem that ill be getting a q6600 soon i just need to think of whether the g92 is worth waiting for

[XtremeTiramisu]

tiramisu
i agree with you there about "orthos stable" requests

there are two overclocks i have on my systems
one 24/7
the other bench stable OC

Thanks Dino for understanding what I was trying to get across there

thanks for the thread it would seem that ill be getting a q6600 soon i just need to think of whether the g92 is worth waiting for

Thanks for reading and best of luck with your upcomming new quad core

[XtremeTiramisu]

Ladies and Gentlemen: Allow me to present you Prime Stable @ 3744mhz results !!



The system has being running nonstop for two days. So far Prime stable for 4 hours and 20mins and counting!
Overall this is one FANTASTIC chip that's prime stable on air at 1.4560v and still under Intel Thermal Spec's 71c I can't get any happier than this.
(Notice that my Ballistix Tracers 8500 are running below its stock clock? nevermind that bcos it's capable of going up to DDR2 1200 or 600mhz at the current given volt of 2.2 and timings
My next screen shot in the near future will show much tighter latency at the current clock and voltage, hopefully)



Tjunction Remaining: Tjunc Rem + Core temp = MAX Tjunction temp for the G0 Q6600. (100c)
Is this clear enough Spanki ??

[[XC] Synthetickiller]

WOW, just WOW! You're slowly creeping up to 4.0ghz on AIR. Just crazy.

I purchased one of these bad boys (still waiting for it like many) and I'm glad to see a higher multiplier w/ lower FSB. You're assured me that having ddr2 800 that can ONLY go to about 500 mhz will more than suffice.

3850 is getting close, then onward to 4000+!

[michaLcoughliN]

3.7 w0w. ima hate you now Cant believe that is on air

[Spanki]

...Tjunction - DTS = coretemp and I even had a screen per the demand asking to show the Tjunction remaining from the coretemp just to show that the core temp is actually picking up the 100c Tjunction properly.

I think you must have missed my earlier response to this, but it's worth repeating...

Note that what I highlighted above may be misleading. The only thing your math proved was that CoreTemp was in fact using 100C as it's Tjunction reference value - not that 100C is the value it is supposed to be using for this stepping.

But we already knew that it was using 100C, because it was listed on the window . The question at hand is whether or not 100C is the proper value. Note that Tjunction is not a register on the chip that CoreTemp can simply read to find out. It's basically looking to see which cpu is being used and using a hard-coded value, depending on whether it's a mobile, conroe-duo, allendale, quad, etc.

So, until Intel verifies what value should be used, we just can't be certain that 100C is correct.

What makes me think it's changed for the G0 stepping? Here's my reasoning...

1. Temperatures being reported for the new E6x50s are way off - obviously 85C is no longer the proper Tjunction value to be used for those.

2. If you look at the Intel alert/notice about the stepping change for this particular cpu (Q6600), you'll see the following:

Tcase for the Intel® Core™2 Quad processor Q6600 and Intel® Xeon® processors X3220 and X3210 on G-0 stepping has been increased by 11 oC. Tcontrol offset will remain the same relative to increase in Tcase which will help reduce acoustics

...also note that 'Tjunction' is also (and perhaps more properly) known as 'maximum Tcase value'. So, what Intel did with this stepping (in addition to some optimizations that allow lower overall voltages) was to "let the cpu get 11C hotter, before cranking up the cpu fan (and/or throttling itself)". This leads me to believe that the Tjunction value was also increased - maybe by 11C, but possibly by some other number.

I'd also note that (at least speaking for myself), there is some confusion/ambiguity about how all of these values relate to each other... Tcase, for example, is (as far as I know) the temperature probe in the center of all cores and is the one that the BIOS and most apps report as 'cpu' temperature, but the way the above is worded, they seem to be specifically talking about 'Tjunction' (or TcaseMax)... they've obviously increased the top-end value of the allowable temperature range.

Given all of the above, I think it's a fairly safe assumption that the 'proper' Tjunction value to use for a G0 stepping Q6600 is 111C - but we really just won't know until Intel shares this information one way or the other (the only thing they've said for certain so far is that the mobile cpus use 100C - at least at the time they said that).

So basically, I don't think we can say for sure what the core temperatures truely are, but for practical/discussion purposes, using CoreTemp's numbers is as good as anything else until/unless some clarification comes from someone who really knows. As mentioned earlier, the only truley meaningfull measurement is whether or not your system is stable at some given speed. If it is (and the voltage you're feeding it is not dangerously high), then it doesn't really matter what the temperature is.

That being the case, the more meaningful number that CoreTemp can give you is the actual DTS value (enable the "Show Delta to Tjunction" option). This tells you how much headroom you have left - regardless of what all the various temperatures are reading. XT showed this @idle earlier, but idle temps never have interested me ... I'd like to see some DTS values for some of these overclocks while under load.

[XtremeTiramisu]

Please look at my post above
I just edited it.
I hope this will clear out things

[Spanki]

Tjunction Remaining: Tjunc Rem + Core temp = MAX Tjunction temp for the G0 Q6600.

I appreciate the enormous text (well, not really), but I don't think you're getting my point. Your quote above would more properly read:

Tjunction Remaining: Tjunc Rem + Core temp = 100C (which is what CoreTemp is currently hard-coded to use as the Tjunction value for the G0 Q6600).

In other words, the fact that the numbers add up to equal 100C, just means that that's the number CoreTemp subtracted the DTS value from - not that that was the value it was supposed to subtract it from.

If you add the DTS value to SpeedFan's numbers, you'll see that it's using 85C as the Tjunction value, but that doesn't make it the right number .

[Spanki]

..in other words, let's assume the Tjunction value is really 110C. If that is in fact the case, you're core temperatures will be 'reported' 10C higher than they are now, but the DTS value would read exactly the same.

If the Tjunction value was really 90C, then you're core temperatures will be 'reported' 10C lower, but the DTS value would read exactly the same.

In any case, thanks for posting the "Delta to Tjunction" shots... it looks like you've still got plenty (~32C) of headroom left - which is great!

[SepheronX]

Like i said over at NCIX forums, get cracking on the game benchmarks

Once again, amazing overclock dude! I hope to get myself a Q6600 or something when I finally get working.

[XtremeTiramisu]

Thanks for the thorough explanations Spanki, I think you may have the right assumptions regarding what's the actual max Tjunction temp for the new G0 Q6600 chip.

We'll just wait for Intel spec info release on this

Ok? let's move on, much appreciated for your kindly concerns

[Spanki]

Agreed.. and sorry for the side-track... I don't/didn't really mean to argue about it, just mentioning it for acedemic/discussion puposes.

I might be full of .

[Xilikon]

Agreed.. and sorry for the side-track... I don't/didn't really mean to argue about it, just mentioning it for acedemic/discussion puposes.

I might be full of .

Don't worry, this needed to be discussed anyway and it's perfectly reasonable for me. What matters the most here is to keep the delta big enough under max load for stability.

[AndyM]

I just gotta say, darn good chip you have there! Holding together on air w/4 cores...wow!

[Brother Esau]

@XtremeTiramisu....Where did you get that chip from NCIX?

[XtremeTiramisu]

Agreed.. and sorry for the side-track... I don't/didn't really mean to argue about it, just mentioning it for acedemic/discussion puposes.

I might be full of .

NP, thanks for trying to bring this concern to the surface

Don't worry, this needed to be discussed anyway and it's perfectly reasonable for me. What matters the most here is to keep the delta big enough under max load for stability.

Yep, this is a major concern for all G0 OC'ers

I just gotta say, darn good chip you have there! Holding together on air w/4 cores...wow!

Thanks !

@XtremeTiramisu....Where did you get that chip from NCIX?

Yes NCIX's Richmond Retail Store in BC, Canada.
Where exactly from NCIX doesn't matter, but I know most of NCIX Q6600 stock are G0s
But it's never a guarantee though, said the NCIX admins.

[XtremeTiramisu]

Ok, one last update and I'm going to have some rest......7hrs Prime Stable at the moment

[UnknownZA]

Congrats XT ..

US

[K.I.T.T.]

Show off!!

j/k

Fantastic chip mate!

[graysky]

This whole tjunction issue really gets at the heart of the G0/B3 debate. In other words, if the tjunction from which you subtracting the DTS from to arrive at the core temp is really 111 instead of 100, the tests speedfan is reportings are off by 26 (26 too low); likewise, the coretemp temps are off by 11 (11 too low). I'd really wanna know the tjunction for sure before trading my B3 in for a G0.

[RLM]

When we seek Orthos or Prime stable, this usally means the OC'ed setting will be used as a 24/7 machine. Taking 24/7 machine into account, his given high voltage 1.63v in BIOS and 1.57v Idle to acheive 3.9ghz may already defeat the purpose of running it on a daily basis unless he doesn't give a damn about longevity of the nice new G0 chip. So it's pointless at this stage whether his G0 Q6600 is prime stable or not.


I can clearly tell by the way his screenshot was captured is that he's seeking for the max possible "bench-stable" OC'ed settings at this stage.

I know this thread is meant for Q6600 G0 Overclock-ability on air but don't missed that his nicely done 3.9ghz clock is on high-end water.

I wonder what's his temp are like at this OC stage on water and what could be the max OC-able speed with water cooling a G0 Q6600. It would be nice to compare whether hundreds of dollars invested in a watercooling is worth taking up the OC up to the next high level from proven 3.7ghz+ on air configuration. (Saying this becouse I'm thinking about watercooling, but short on fund )

First off congrats on your chip there I'm struggling to get close to your results and as you know I'm on water.

I see your results which are at full load, tell me albeit the voltage dampening how close are those vcore readings to the ones set in bios? This thread is certainly selling Asus.

Spot on about the bench and 24/7 things. This is actually my work kit used for 3D, so all 4 cores are maxed out pretty regularly. Albeit I'm not quite as precious with this chip as I was with the QX6700, I'll be looking for something closer to prime stable 24/7. 3.7ghz is probably a good figure to consider. Make that an excellent figure Either way I'm still pretty smitten at being able to run those benches at 3.9.

As for the watercooling. I'm in Thailand here, so temps are evenly hot all year round. This makes watercooling a pretty easy choice. In addition I know that the bulk of the kit, rad, pump etc will get me through a few more upgrades.

That's the justifying out the way, but basically buying all these bits of kit are just part of the addiction. In no way helped by this forum

RLM

[Spanki]

This whole tjunction issue really gets at the heart of the G0/B3 debate. In other words, if the tjunction from which you subtracting the DTS from to arrive at the core temp is really 111 instead of 100, the tests speedfan is reportings are off by 26 (26 too low); likewise, the coretemp temps are off by 11 (11 too low). I'd really wanna know the tjunction for sure before trading my B3 in for a G0.

But... here's the thing - if the new chips are actually 11C hotter than what's being shown currently - it doesn't matter - because they have 11C more headroom to work with (everything's relative).

- Since the G0 stepping 'generally' needs less voltage for a given overclock (YMMV), then they will 'generally' run cooler than B3 stepping. This means you can either run them cooler at the same overclock, or potentially higher overclock for the same temperature (by adding more voltage). Either way is a win (again, assuming you get a good chip).

- In addition to running cooler, they might (likely) also have that extra 11C of headroom to play with before overheating, along with a scaled fan setting (for anyone who uses PWM) to keep the system quieter at higher temps (the fans don't ramp up as early).

...having said that, if you already have a B3 that you're happy with, it might be difficult to justify swapping out for a G0 (I'd probably personally wait for 45nm quad-core parts). But if you just bought it after the price drop and can still return it... that's a different story .

[strange|ife]

ugh my G0 is has been sitting in limbo in Richmond . BC for 2 days now being sorted.