Retail Q9650 Overclocking Thread

[andressergio]

WOW Great score Sergio. That's a huge jump.

thanks mate this drivers are awesome congrats to nvidia for this a hughe jump, i checked on games and really screams

Cheers
Sergio

[andressergio]

Sergio, did your beta key still work for 7600?

no i have some tool to do it wich works as a charm

Cheers
Sergio

[NapalmV5]

20fps gain @ 190.38/285 @ 770/1620/1300



thanks sergio

[NapalmV5]

unmodded 1gb 285 air/stock cooled @ 792/1764/1447

[Fritz_the_germ]

@ViVID,
I haven´t made it over FSB 500 MHZ.
500 MHz seem to be the limit for this board running a quad anyway. If you want to try it any further the vnb should be the key. I didn´t feel like firing more than 1.45V to my nb.

[ViViD]

Tanx Fritz_the_germ
My Quad Stable In 505 Mhz FSB With 1.6Volt Vcore And Vnb=1.52V
I Try To Change Board With Giga P45 Soon
I Hope This Board(Giga) Work Great For Me

[NapalmV5]

4.7ghz/ep45-extreme/all air cooled

[OC Nub]

unmodded 1gb 285 air/stock cooled @ 792/1764/1447

Great score.

[andressergio]

20fps gain @ 190.38/285 @ 770/1620/1300



thanks sergio

great mate but thats on xp32 im on W7 x64 lol i will catch you

today benchs on xp 32

[OC Nub]

Picked up a q9650 this morning. A newer batch, it is a C chip. Looks like my usual luck with bad sensors at idle.

[andressergio]

Picked up a q9650 this morning. A newer batch, it is a C chip. Looks like my usual luck with bad sensors at idle.

congrats for that vid mate

[OC Nub]

Thanks Sergio. I should do the break in period but I am impatient. Priming now at 4ghz. .
Temps under load even out within 3c of each other so I think it is just the idle bug.

[andressergio]

I change my screens as my drivers where corrupted and was scoring lower than the real thing...i also lower CPU speed as you napalm, my core don't go over 783, but i tested on my 100% OC clocks that I play all games and are this:

Windows XP32 SP3 - NVIDIA beta 190.38

Q9650 @ 4608 - GTX285 771/1800/3024

Unigine Sanctuary v2.2 defaults fullscreen



Cheers
Sergio

[OC Nub]

So, I've never seen a CPU with a batch number having a C in the batch number.

Lenny, I see you have a L846C over there, and it has a 1.225 VID.. thats a sweet VID, that is what I want.

There is a guy I know selling a L847C.. that is a recent Q9650.. I might buy it but not sure what to think of the C. is C better than B as it's on a denser part of the wafer? a, then b, and now C since there is more room using 45nm chips? or what? I don't know. Also I recently bought a Q9550 with a L844B batch date, and sadly it had a 1.300 VID. I was not happy. but it wasn't for me. I want a Q9650.

Let me know guys.

I just picked up a 9650 batch#L847C037. 1.175VID. Testing now.





Nice run Sergio!

[andressergio]

I just picked up a 9650 batch#L847C037. 1.175VID. Testing now.
Nice run Sergio!

Thank you Tom hope this batch is better for you...i had to update my screen as i found that drivers on XP where messed up and score whas lower...Just posted on my 100% stable clocks to play and very very close to napalm

Cheers
Sergio

[ViViD]

You Guys Realy Cool
Thread Not Rest For 1Hour
Ur Benching Is Too Fast And Great Work I Hope Be Happy Like This In Real Life
I Changed My Q9550 With Better Batch I See Simillar Bath Number Like My New CPU 4.4 Stable In 1.42 I Wish It Work For Me

[OC Nub]

Testing some more Prime blend with the new CPU.



Nice bump in score Sergio. You and Napalm are very close.

[andressergio]

You Guys Realy Cool
Thread Not Rest For 1Hour
Ur Benching Is Too Fast And Great Work I Hope Be Happy Like This In Real Life
I Changed My Q9550 With Better Batch I See Simillar Bath Number Like My New CPU 4.4 Stable In 1.42 I Wish It Work For Me

thanks ViViD !!! we will not make it rest lol

Congrats and good luck to you

[NapalmV5]

Great score.

thanks

great vid @ c q9650

how does it compare to b q9650 ?

same temp ? hotter/cooler ?

I change my screens as my drivers where corrupted and was scoring lower than the real thing...i also lower CPU speed as you napalm, my core don't go over 783, but i tested on my 100% OC clocks that I play all games and are this:

Windows XP32 SP3 - NVIDIA beta 190.38

Q9650 @ 4608 - GTX285 771/1800/3024

Unigine Sanctuary v2.2 defaults fullscreen



Cheers
Sergio

lower your shaders/mem.. look at my 2gb 285.. 200 less mem clocks.. almost 200 less shaders clocks.. but at 770 core im just 1 fps behind you

first lower shaders @ 1764/1728 and if it doesnt allow higher core than lower mem clocks @ 1447/1404

you should be able to match my 220.0 fps

[OC Nub]

Runs a bit warmer than my other chip but so far oc's better on less vcore. For 4.25ghz I needed 1.328v on my old chip, this needs 1.280v for the same clocks. Hope to reach 4.5ghz stable.

[andressergio]

lower your shaders/mem.. look at my 2gb 285.. 200 less mem clocks.. almost 200 less shaders clocks.. but at 770 core im just 1 fps behind you

first lower shaders @ 1764/1728 and if it doesnt allow higher core than lower mem clocks @ 1447/1404

you should be able to match my 220.0 fps

thank you napalm did you like the new drivers ? seems a big bump on unigine, im testing games...
Cheers Sergio

[OC Nub]

Ran Sanctuary 1920x1080 8Xaa 16Xaf. Had to back my core clocks down to not artifact. Hard test to run at hi res/hi settings.

[Makubex_GB]

Ran Sanctuary default full screen with my stable 24/7 clocks:

CPU: 4.2GHz
GPU: 817/950



I'm gonna try and push the clocks some more later.

[OC Nub]

Nice score!!

I like this program. It seems to be a better bench for gfx than 3dmark. Increasing CPU speed doesn't effect the score much at all.

[Fritz_the_germ]

@ViViD,
I hope you show us your oc results.

P.S. I like your president