Q6600 - danger?

Hello.

Just some questions, might sound stupid to some of you, but:

I have a Q6600 on P5K @ 2.40 GHz. Just bought OCZ ram - PC9200, max
freq is 1150 MHz. To get them running at this speed, I had to set the
FSB to 288 (was 266) and the mutliplier to 9 (1152 MHz). But the
processor speed also increased (of course) to 2592 MHz. That is 192
MHz above.

OC-ing the CPU was not my intention, I just wanted to get the memory
modules to run at the intended speed. Hence:

Would the higher CPU-speed invite any damages to my CPU? I've got a
really powerful fan that keeps the temp to < 43C at full load. I've
also tried Memtest+, no errors reported. BTW, I've read about guys
having their Q6600 @ 2.40 GHz OC-ed to 3.3GHz and beyond, so my
perception is that my marginal OC be small scaled compared to those!
But I am asking anyway.

Should I do anything about the voltage settings? VCore is reported to
1.30, AVcc to 3.25, but +12V is 11.77.

Regards,

Ronny Mandal

Ronny Mandal wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Just some questions, might sound stupid to some of you, but:
>
> I have a Q6600 on P5K @ 2.40 GHz. Just bought OCZ ram - PC9200, max
> freq is 1150 MHz. To get them running at this speed, I had to set the
> FSB to 288 (was 266) and the mutliplier to 9 (1152 MHz). But the
> processor speed also increased (of course) to 2592 MHz. That is 192
> MHz above.
>
> OC-ing the CPU was not my intention, I just wanted to get the memory
> modules to run at the intended speed. Hence:
>
> Would the higher CPU-speed invite any damages to my CPU? I've got a
> really powerful fan that keeps the temp to < 43C at full load. I've
> also tried Memtest+, no errors reported. BTW, I've read about guys
> having their Q6600 @ 2.40 GHz OC-ed to 3.3GHz and beyond, so my
> perception is that my marginal OC be small scaled compared to those!
> But I am asking anyway.
>
> Should I do anything about the voltage settings? VCore is reported to
> 1.30, AVcc to 3.25, but +12V is 11.77.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ronny Mandal

I see a "CPU Ratio" setting in the BIOS, and that just might be the
multiplier control. 9 x 266 would be stock 2400 core. Dropping the multiplier
to a lower value, will reduce the degree of overclock you are
applying to the core. In this thread, I've seen them use 9, 8, and
7 for the multiplier (unlocked downward). After each change, you
could try a program like CPUZ, to try to verify whether the BIOS
is doing what you think. I don't think Intel puts the possible
multiplier value, in public documents, which is why someone has to
do the experiments, to see what works.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=152722&page=4&hig...ght=q66

As for damage, in the short term, probably not. In the long term,
only time will tell. Electromigration is one damage mechanism.
Even though I've heard of electromigration, it hasn't stopped me
from overclocking the processor in this computer From 2.8GHz
to 3.2Ghz, or a 14% overclock.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration

Have fun,
Paul