Hi ppl,

I've never OC b4 but am thinking of doing it for my upcoming PC. I'm content with 3.2Ghz so am looking for the best way to get there.

Originally I was pretty set on Q6600 since there r sooo many successful examples around here and I feel safe knowing I can get help when needed but I'm worried about the heat problem. Apart from having a CPU cooler, I don't have any special cooling added. Q8200 seemed like a better option from that point of view. However, I'm given the impression that it's not a good candidate for OCing.

So, I'm left to wonder... If I only want 3.2Ghz (that's not OCing a lot yes?)... will a Q8200 do it easily? Or is that already pushing it's limit? The mobo I'm eyeing on is EP45-UD3L from Gigabyte and I'm only using normal Kingston DDR2 800 rams.

Help? Thanks!

I would suggest getting the Q6600 instead... or the QX6800 OEM (about the same price).

The Q8200 bus is already at 1333MHz FSB, which means its mulitplier is pretty low (its 7.0)... Thus you will need very high FSB to reach 3.2GHz.

This post has been edited by lex: Jan 3 2009, 10:38 PM

but the higher the FSB means better performance rite??

*that is juz my thought... mayb completely wrong... and i guess so...*

Q6600, hands down and if u plan to go further than 3.2, also Q6600.

The lower fsb on the Q6600 makes ocing easier and not so mobo demanding.

Make sure u get a Q6600 Go stepping

But, QX6800 beats it easily

---

Added on January 3, 2009, 10:47 pmSlightly faster, but reduced ocing capability and also lower multiplier in this case

This post has been edited by shaun3230: Jan 3 2009, 10:47 PM

Hi,

about your concern, it happen to me recently too. Leaving me wondering whether to buy Quad or Duo. At the same time, price of the processor also is taken into consideration making it more and more difficult to choose a product. I went to tomshardware.com to search for answer as there are many articles on it. Let me summarise what i had read.

When using processor, the below things is taken into consideration.
a) Application that can run multiple core or single core.
b) price of the processor
c) future consideration
d) overclockking

a) multiple core application
===================
This is very important as it will determine the effectiveness of your processor usage. If you application is only design to run single core and not multiple core, then quo core is not better than duo core with the same clock frequency. Meaning if you have quad core 2.6Ghz and a duo core 2.6Ghz running a non-multiple thread application, there is no different at all. But if you put a multi-thread application into runs, then there will be significant increase of performance at least 15% and above over duo core processor.

Even a E2160 over clock to 3.2 can have the same performance as a quad core 3.2ghz processor if the application doesn't support multi-thread. Believe it or not, but reality is so.

b) Price
=====
a Quad core on lower speed is definately expensive than a duo core with high speed. This is because quad core include more transistors in it. So the main concern in purchase processor is whether u willing to put more money on lower speed quad core processor and not be able to fully maximize the usage of the processor OR you willing to give up the technology of quad core and go for more practically processor (duo core) which every application can benefit from it 100%. if you check the price, Q6600(2.4) is RM680 but E8400 (3.0) is RM590 at the moment. So you need to be wise on using your money. Until now looks like you are influenced and have more attempt toward duo core....which is cheaper yet can fully utilise and faster too. But wait till you read the next paragraph.

c) Future Consideration
===============
Even though duo core is faster in many application compare quad core on the same PRICE Product, meaning Q6600 VS E8400, Q6850 VS E8600 (similar price product) BUT this might not be through in the future as more and more application is been written in supporting multi-threading. Don't every compare Quad with duo core for the same clock frequency as quad will always win. What i am taking is similar price product. Okay...going back to future consideration, games, 3D application is starting to using multi-thread technology and begin to utilise the quad core processor. For those application like office and DVD burning that dont use multi-thread , ...by the way we dont care so much....because we dont need such a fast processing for those appplication as it already can run very fast with low end processor such as E2180. So at this point is better to have quad core over duo core now to be ready for next generation application. Believe me with an application supporting multi-thread , Q6600 (2.4) can be faster thab duo core (3.0) with at least 10% different. That is where allyour money pay off.

d) Overclocking
===========
This is the main part and must not forget topic to be discussed. Quad core has more overlocking power compare to duo core. Why ? at duo core you only have two core to do uppgrade, whereas in quad core you have 4 core to upgrade. You heard "sikit sikit lama lama jadi bukit" theory" This is what happen to 4 core processor. And also if you think current application doesnt support 4 core, but require more clock frequency, then just overclock your quad core processor comparable to duo core processor that your intend to buy. But the risk is you going to void your warranty if any things happen. but no worries, many ppl over clock the processor easily and still not damage the processor. JUst remember ...DON OVER CLOCK it....


Conclusion
========
okay dude, i have been talking to long....hope this summary can help others saving hours and hours of time searching for answer.
Thanks.

Nice explanation there dude.

For me, I`ll consider the future, so quad is for me. And just ask urself this, how much difference is 3.8GHz (average max Q6600 oc) vs 4.5GHz (average max E8400 oc)??

In fact any core processor above 3Ghz is considered fast

yeah. quad is definitely the best choice considering the future. many oncoming software will definitely be multi threaded.

vote goes to Q6600 instead Q8200...

*edited

This post has been edited by magna_voxx: Jan 4 2009, 01:16 AM

Q6600 if u re an oc-er...

tried E6600 and E6550 before... they ve the same config (E6600, Q6600 - 266x9, E6550, Q8200 - 333x7)... trust me, E6600 is way much easier to oc...

Q6600 or E8400 all the way,screw Q8200

aiyar how come everyone say screw q8200 wor? just bought 1 but havent assembled yet

well, if u re a normal user, both are roughly the same...

but if u re an oc-er, Q6600 is a better choice...

ok lar, i dont plan to oc also...or shud i sell the proc and get other.

if dun oc never mind la...

juz use as per normal can liao... no point wasting money rit...

i am migrating from p4 2.8 and c2d t5500 to this quad soon any significant faster ar?

Non ocer, Q82000 lo

For oc, Q6600 Go is legend!

---

Added on January 4, 2009, 11:40 amt5550? Of cource quad faster

This post has been edited by shaun3230: Jan 4 2009, 11:40 AM

i choose over q6600, coz newer tech and hopefully shud be cooler not sure make rite choice or not. q8200 got sse4.1 and 45nm tech

But it is not better than a q6600. The 8200 will not hv the q6600 prowess in ocing.

But at stock speeds i think the 8200 is a bit faster

ic at stock speed is faster, nvm, after my rig is assembled i will se how:P

i dont think so... e2160 has just 1mb l2 cache while q6600 has 8mb... there will surely be a difference there

q6600 > q8200... nuff said... 3.2ghz on stock vcore with no problemo

ibenq vista 32 bit can fully utilise 8gb ram?

nope... installed for fun ... now got 2gb nia ler... didnt update siggy @@

oh ok, i thought vista 32 bit can lol

32 bit can detect 3GB the most..

i know 32bit can support up to 3gb, i thought vista have patch to fix it .....

Q8200 is faster than Q6600 clock for clock, runs cooler and consumes less power. If your target is only 3.2Ghz, I'd go with Q8200. Math shows that you only need FSB of 457, which isn't all that difficult.

To get your RAM to DDR2-914, which is what you need for FSB457, give it more voltage (around 2.1 to 2.2 should be ok) and loosen the timings a bit. Run memtest to verify.

But for sure it will have trouble hitting 4.2ghz air/liquid 3dm06 benchable and 3.8-4ghz 24/7

Haha that's a motherboard issue, not core issue =p 4.2Ghz is 600x7, even 3.8 is 543x7..what's the limit for UD3P?

Quad Core 24/7 stability usually drop off at 480FSB,with 510FSB or so max on some good quad core clocker so that is 3.57ghz is more or less 24/7 limite
So far,haven't see 600FSB yet
Max i saw and that is good,580FSB validated
So,max validated with ideal condition and all,come to around slightly over 4ghz or so but not stable for multi core benching for sure

Thanks guys... I appreciate all the input, I definitately learnt a lot.

Since i'm a noob at OC... I have absolutely no idea what's the FSB thingie but from your explaination... I'm guessing you're saying Q8200 using normal Kingston RAM and the EP45-UD3L motherboard can do it without a problem?

Can give more details on what should I do to get my FSB to 457? Sorry... I know I should do more reading b4 asking so many questions *blush* ... but I have to decide tonite bcos I'm buying them tomorrow.

Thanks again!

32bit vista can detect my 8gb with no whatsoever patch, but only uses 3328mb of ram

just up ur bus speed to 457... and up voltage for ram,proc,northbridge if necessary

Ic ic..yupz kinda thought the limit was around 500FSB. I personally felt it with the Tpower+Q9450 last time, even 505FSB needed drastic voltage d.
Anyways, sorry to TS for taking this thread OT, just wanted to confirm the limits with OC4/3 =p

Sigh nvm, I'm free (and in a good mood) so I'll explain from scratch.
Intel C2Q processor speed is determined by FSB times multiplier. In a Q8200's case, that figure is 333Mhz(FSB) x 7(multiplier), which gives us 2.33Ghz. Since your multiplier is low, that would mean that to get to 3.2Ghz you require 457x7. (Intel FSB figures are quad pumped, i.e. FSB1333=333.33Mhz, DDR figures are double pumped, i.e. DDR2-800=400Mhz).

Another issue is your RAM. The lowest speed you can run your RAM at is 1:1 with your FSB speed. Thus you require DDR2-914@457FSB, overclocking your RAM by 57Mhz.

Next let's talk about Q6600. To get 3.2Ghz with Q6600 is really easy. Q6600 is 266x9. To get 3.2Ghz, you want 400x8 (you can set multiplier lower, but not higher than what Intel gives you). 400x8 is ridiculously easy since your RAM and board are running at spec.

However Q8200@3.2Ghz will be faster than Q6600@3.2Ghz I'd say by 8-10%. Also, Q8200 runs cooler and consumes less power.
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,660917/..._and_Phenom_X4/

Finally let's talk about practical limits. New Q6600s rarely get to 3.6Ghz, you're most likely to get to 3.2 or 3.4. Q8200@3.2Ghz will outperform it.

So in conclusion what I'm saying is not that UD3L+KVR can take Q8200 to 3.2Ghz without a problem, it will be able to do it, but with proper tweaking. That tweaking is IMO worth it, to get the 8-10% performance and the power and heat savings over Q6600.

Now to get your FSB to 457, take it slowly. Go to 400x7 without messing with Vcore. Set Vtt to 1.35V, Core GTL Ref 1 to 0.63x, run IBT 10 loops and test for stability. Then go up 5Mhz at a time, whenever you fail IBT increase Vcore or Vnb 1 notch.

Usually in game performance, the Q6600 is slightly faster than the Q8200 as seen in this review. This is usually due to Q6600 bigger cache and slightly higher clock speed.. As can be noticed, games loves cache (and clock speed).

Talking about overclocking, the Q6600 would be the easiest to reach 3.2GHz... using standard RAM and motherboards. Which is why Q6600 gets my vote in the beginning...

However for Q8200 to reach 3.2GHz, there are hidden/extra costs involved such as getting a better (expensive super overclocking) motherboard, performance RAM (going above 400MHz system bus means the RAM will have to run faster than 800MHz, that means DDR2-1066 RAM is recommended) and the best 3rd party HSF (heatsink and fan). Going above 450MHz system bus (or 1600MHz FSB) isn't easy..

how about QX6800 ? whats the OC FSB value if i want to take it to 3.2-3.5 Ghz? mind to explain to me as well coz im a new in OC too , Thank you very much >.<

im using the Biostar TP43 HP Mobo and a pair of value RAM of DDR2 800 Mhz.

actually i do not intend to adjust the CPU voltage as i heard that it will somehow shortened the life span of the processor. Any guides ?

QX6800 is already 2.9ghz at stock speed. so u didnt need to do much tweaking just to get to 3.2ghz.

bout that (voltage), yup. it will shorten the lifespan but only if u push it too hard. if just do light OC, there wont be much damage or maybe none. (note:decent cooling is a MUST if u're into OC)

Dude,just pop calculator up and calculate,easy

normal usage without OC, but use for 3D rendering, wat do you guys think? Q6600 or Q8200? or any better and cheaper proc? 3D rendering requires more cache or FSB? gaming requires cache or FSB?

Try:400x8,5:6 divider aka 480mhz/DDR 2 960,1.95vdimm and PL7 or so.
Vcore try yourself