Jump to content
shiver_8

What an E8400 does at 4.5ghz

Recommended Posts

It's not news to me that high voltage is obviously not good for a cpu. I have read many forums and sites of people who run their E8400 (C0 and E0) at a mere 4ghz with my same voltage, with all of them using cheap air coolers and getting into the 70C range. And after a year these people have had no problems to speak of. In all honesty, I think in a year I will be upgrading the processor at a minimum. Also I have done research on water cooling systems compared to air cooling and I have found that most of the time you are needing to spend excess of $250 to get a cool running loop (basically just a good waterblock and a huge rad). I have seen that my air cooler runs about 10C hotter than the $300 water cooling loops. TBH, I don't even think 10C justifies spending over $100 on any cooling, never mind $250. The really cheap watercooling (like the swiftech kits with just a cpu block and a 120/240mm rad) run the same or hotter temps than my air cooler, and they cost about 10 times as much ($23 for the heatsink). So when it comes down to it unless I am going to watercool some video cards as well and really get into it, $250+ is money I don't want to spend and money I honestly don't have to simply cool the processor. And I haven't found a piece of evidence yet that shows high vcore and 65C temps equal dead chip. All the stories I hear of dead chips are from over volting the fsb, which mine is within spec.

I completely agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but in that logic then my Q9450 would step up to the plate and beat the stock clocked i7 lol.

 

Guess I forgot to throw in there that the i7 is much faster clock for clock than an e8400 =P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guess I forgot to throw in there that the i7 is much faster clock for clock than an e8400 =P

it still has to answer you my 4.0ghz Q9450, but in all seriousness I wonder what mhz level I'd have to set my Q9450 down to, so I'd have as close to the performance level of a stock i7 (920)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably 4.5ghz (almost 2x the i7, due to hyperthreading).

you really don't think I'd beat a stock i7 as I am now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not to rain on your parade but that time isn't really that good for a core 2 at 4.5 if you ran that exact same superPi 1m test in xp you'd prob be down in the high 8's or low 9's with the same overclock. still a nice overclock tho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you really don't think I'd beat a stock i7 as I am now?
You might, I just think hyperthreading is like 2.66ghz times 2 IMO. Also I don't give a rats a** about my SuperPi times. I use my overclock because there is a huge difference in programs and gaming, not because I care about SuperPi. And also I think XP sucks, Vista was like a godsend for me. Hated the layout of XP. Thanks for the input tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

beat an i7 core for core? never because the i7 has ht and has ddr3 memory and it also has a bigger cache. c2d's are awesome for gaming but thats about it

 

 

 

 

 

You might, I just think hyperthreading is like 2.66ghz times 2 IMO. Also I don't give a rats a** about my SuperPi times. I use my overclock because there is a huge difference in programs and gaming, not because I care about SuperPi. And also I think XP sucks, Vista was like a godsend for me. Hated the layout of XP. Thanks for the input tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beat an i7 core for core? never because the i7 has ht and has ddr3 memory and it also has a bigger cache. c2d's are awesome for gaming but thats about it
I think you were mistaken by what I said... I said that once the hyperthreading is thrown in the mix it is like the i7 920's 2.66ghz multiplied by 2 (hence HYPERTHREADING). So I said that if he wanted to match or beat the core i7 he would need about 4.5ghz to get close, but 5.32 is really what 2.66x2 is. The reason I personally didn't go for i7 is the need to change so much hardware. I'm not going to drop $300 on a cpu, then $400 on a decent MB, then another $150 for ram. And for what real-world gain that I am going to see? I just use my PC for internet, emails, but mostly gaming. And if I kept my 9800gtx+ then that would be the next bottleneck to upgrade. Too much to just replace, I will wait until like everything else computers, the price drops and becomes affordable enough to justify the change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not to rain on your parade but that time isn't really that good for a core 2 at 4.5 if you ran that exact same superPi 1m test in xp you'd prob be down in the high 8's or low 9's with the same overclock. still a nice overclock tho

 

Not to "rain on your parade" either. But in fact, you would need to be between 4.9ghz and 5.5ghz to be in the 8's or 9's, even using XP.

 

Just check the Im Pi runs in the Socket 775 Oc Competition Thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to "rain on your parade" either. But in fact, you would need to be between 4.9ghz and 5.5ghz to be in the 8's or 9's, even using XP.

 

Just check the Im Pi runs in the Socket 775 Oc Competition Thread.

That's what I was thinking...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got bored today so I decided to take a couple of sticks of ram out and play a little bit. Hopefully you are still messing with yours Shiver to see if you can optimize it a little bit. You may be able to get that voltage down a little bit.

 

post-65878-1240963751_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

×