[xactly]

iv read a review of the ninja scythe and was the quitest, best cooling and easiest to install but the review was made before quads were out so im not to sure but i'll do some research thanks for your help also could someone tell me (if they have a quad) what speed they got theres up to and what parameters they'v used.

[cyberspacegenie]

Hi xactly, if you look at your post on 'ram speeds' you'll see that I've put a link in there which refers to a guide about overclocking quads. Its really useful and may answer a few of your questions.

In terms of speeds. The very highest I've seen on air was 3.6ghz but I think that kind of overclock is extremely rare, especially on air. On average I think the highest is about 3.4Ghz, but thats with a good cooler. if you are trying to go for this kind of overclock then choose your cooler wisely. ultimately though like Alex said it depends on your chip. Some people have had problems getting past 2.8Ghz.

Currently I am running a Q6600 G0 @ 3Ghz. Vcore voltage is 1.30. FSB 333x9 (multiplier). My ambient temps have been quite high so I have tried to go any higher than that. I may try to go to 3.2Ghz. if i do I'll post it but all I will be doing is raising the FSB as I want to keep temps down so I wont raise vcore by much if any.

If you want a really high overclock then you are better off going for a core 2 duo rather than a quad. generally people get higher overclocks on those because they produce less heat. On quads heat is the restricting factor.

When you run stress testing software, such as orthos, your load temps will go pretty high. there is a lot of debate about what is too high for a quad but I think the general consensus seems to be 60-65c (better 60c than 65c though). some people argue that up to 70c is ok but personally I wouldnt push it much past 60c.

Be careful as well in terms of the software you use to measure temps. Speedfan for example will not give accurate readings for a quad (I think in the next version this is corrected) so use coretemp or TAT. I use both.

[xactly]

tanks for your help i'll keep that in mind but i was told that quads are more futureproof and i was only planing on getting it slightly higher because of the scores i've seen on here i thought i would only need to overclock liitle bit to get it better at games than the duo's.

[cyberspacegenie]

To be honest in terms of games I dont think you'll see a difference between a dual core and a quad core in current games. If you add a E6600, for example, in that table you'll see the performance is the same as the quad. most current games aren't designed to use the additional cores so there is no performance gain with a quad. Most gamers I think would recommend dual cores at the mo so you can reach higher speeds because of the higher overclocking capacity of a dual. But then you also have to take into account the graphics card too.

No doubt this will change in the future, and in the long term I think more and more software will be developed to take advantage of the extra cores.

[xactly]

thats my point im not sure weather to get a q6600 or a e6600 upwards.

[hAvAAck]

Originally Posted by xactly

thats my point im not sure weather to get a q6600 or a e6600 upwards.

judging by your avatar with the microsoft, I assume you're not an open-source guy, so there's probably little reason to get a quad-core

[xactly]

Originally Posted by hAvAAck

judging by your avatar with the microsoft, I assume you're not an open-source guy, so there's probably little reason to get a quad-core

whats open source mean?

[cyberspacegenie]

It kinda depends on when you plan to upgrade your system and how you use it. I got a quad cause the prices went down and I'm not planning to upgrade for a few years.

My logic would be this - if your usage is mainly games, internet and day to day stuff then and you plan to upgrade your cpu within 1-2 years then you would probably be better off with a dual because you'll get a faster cpu for less money. Then, when you upgrade you will be able to get a better quad as the technology will have moved on by then. If you are planning to keep the cpu more long term or do anything heavy duty with software like photoshop, video encoding or rendering then it might be better to get the quad. The fact is that it will take at least a year or so before quads really come into their own and even then it will only be if you have the latest software that can support it.

[xactly]

so would a 6850 be my choice then same price and i could upgrade it to a quad once the software is quad supported like you say thanks for your help "Cyberspaceengine" youv gave me a lot of detailed answers id plus rep ya but i don't know how.

[cyberspacegenie]

No probs, I'm glad to help if I can.