Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Well, my awesome mate doyl gave me his Q6600 because his motherboard died, I stuck a TRUE 120 on it and overclocked it to 3.2ghz. It's so much faster now that I'm not even going to bother upgrading (for now)!

  • 2 weeks later...

Well, my awesome mate doyl gave me his Q6600 because his motherboard died, I stuck a TRUE 120 on it and overclocked it to 3.2ghz. It's so much faster now that I'm not even going to bother upgrading (for now)!

Damn straight!

It's ok though, my new chip poos all over the 6600.

Currently sitting on 4022mhz ;)

^^ what chip and is that air

i have had my Q6600 @ 3.4 on air but during the middle of summer my computer room gets too hot and my computer does random restarts

what can the i7 2600's get up too 1155 socket

^^ what chip and is that air

i have had my Q6600 @ 3.4 on air but during the middle of summer my computer room gets too hot and my computer does random restarts

Q6600 on 3.2 was air with this http://www.overclock...p_se14_review/4

New chip is an i7 960 using an H70 to cool it. Kind of underwhelming really.

Want to get a proper water cooling setup again :P

As for the 2600 - 2600k thing, yes, an unlocked multiplier.

Apparently most overclocking is locked on the non-K chips, so if you want to overclock, best bet will be the 2500K or 2600K.

And yeah, they overclock like nothing else.

Edited by doyl

2600k have been doing 4.5ghz on air.

If you had a hotter room etc, just lap the CPU head and you'll get a few degrees out of it. I managed to drop 7 degrees lapping my E8400 - which has run @ 4.1-4.2ghz 24x7 on air for 3-4 years or so :)

http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/Feature/135165,atomic-guide-to-cpu-lapping.aspx/1

Mine took me about 2 hours whilst i was watching TV.

If i actually paid attention im sure i could cut that time in half :)

A CPU heatsink is never perfectly flat as you'll see in the guide. You also use less thermal paste as a result after 'lapping'

But ye, i picked up a good 7 degree drop. Pretty impressive for a couple hours work. One of the best value modifications really if you intend to overclock as all it takes it about $10 and 2hrs. Some CPU's might get more, some might get less. All depends on how covex your CPU lid is from the manufacturer. My E8400 was TERRIBLE.

yeah i don't think i will be going through that process

makes your CPU look shit house and if you do have to send it back for warranty er yeah good luck with that

You fry it due to OC, don't even bother with warranty attempt :P

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...