reluctant overclocker considering C2D E6600

I was looking to put together a C2D box, with no thought of
overclocking, when I noticed the E6600 was slightly more expensive than
the E6750. I figured that must be because the E6600 is easily OCable,
and some googling and reading here confirm it. So I find myself in the
same boat as a few years ago when I built my current box; the P4 1.6A
was too good an OCer to pass up. I've been running it at 2133 MHz for
five years, though it would go a bit higher.

I don't OC because I enjoy it, but if it's easy I'd like to take
advantage of the gain in performance without spending more. I'm not
willing to do anything other than stock cooling. I will use some
thermal goop rather than whatever cpu/hsf interface Intel ships. So, if
I go with the E6600, is it a very good bet I can run it at 3.0 GHz with
the stock hsf in an Antec Sonata III case?

If it's a nearly sure thing (I know there are no sure things with OCing
plans), I'll take that chance. From googling and reading some here, it
seems a safe bet, but I'm curious to see if anyone's been /unable/ to
get a E6600 to 3.0 without extra measures.

In case anything in my proposed setup looks problematic to you, here it
is:

Antec Sonata III case, comes with 500 watt PSU
ASUS P5K mainboard (P35 and ICH9 chipsets)
Corsair TWIN2X2048-6400C4
EVGA GeForce 8600GTS 256MB 128-bit GDDR3
Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD3200AAKS 320GB 7200 RPM
16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb
ASUS DRW-1814BLT SATA optical drive

'»Q«' wrote, in part:
|I was looking to put together a C2D box, with no thought of
| overclocking, when I noticed the E6600 was slightly more expensive than
| the E6750. I figured that must be because the E6600 is easily OCable,
| and some googling and reading here confirm it. So I find myself in the
| same boat as a few years ago when I built my current box; the P4 1.6A
| was too good an OCer to pass up. I've been running it at 2133 MHz for
| five years, though it would go a bit higher.
_____

For such a mild overclock as a 2.66 GHz E6750 @ 3.0 GHz, FSB = 450 MHz (only
12%) you should choose the E6750 over the more expensive E6600. For the
short version, you can skip to ***** B^)

The E4300 and other E4xxx CPUs have the advantage of requiring a lower FSB
for overclocking (2.7 GHz for the 1.8 GHz E4300 requires only a 300 MHz FSB
(9X 300 MHz = 2.7 GHz), 333 MHz for 3.0 GHz, and 400 MHz for 3.6 GHz. The
2.4 GHz E6600 requires the same FSB speeds for the same CPU speeds. A 2.66
GHz E6750 requires a 375 MHz FSB for 3.0 GHz and a 450 MHz for 3.6 GHz
(because the higher stock FSB speed of 1333 MHz and the lower CPU
multiplier; X8 vs. X9). As you can see, the lower stock FSBs for the E4x00
series and the E6x00 series CPUs is an advantage if you are going for high
overclocks (~ 50% or more) because of limitations of the motherboard FSB
speeds (the nVidia 680i chipset motherboards have higher FSB capabilities
than Intel chipsets prior to the P35 (perhaps higher than the P35), but for
mild overclocks the E6750 gives more bang for the buck (IF you have a
motherboard capable of FSB speeds over 1333 MHz.

I use the EVGA 680i motherboard with an E4300 (1.8 GHz stock) running at 2.7
GHz with core voltage set to 0.075 volts below stock (with air cooling.)
Though I now use an after market air cooler (ThermalTake i7, $35 US), the
50% overclock to 2.7 GHz was pretty much a gimmie with the undervolted CPU.
With the Intel boxed, retail heatsink fan and thermal pad the CPU core
temperatures at 100% load (Intel TAT) were in the high 60s C. The
ThermalTake reduced the core temperatures by 6 or 7 C. Though I can reach a
higher overclock than 2.7 GHz, the ease and convenience (completely stable
[over a pretty wide ambient temperature range this summer]) of staying at
the 50% 2.7 GHz overclock can't be beat by the small performance increase of
3.15 GHz. Any higher than 3.15 GHz with my particular CPU will require
water cooling. I use an Enlight EN-8950 case with two 80 mm fans in the
rear panel blowing out, one 120 mm fan in the front blowing in across the
hard drives, power supply blowing out, 120 mm fan in the side blowing in
toward the CPU, memory, chipset, and primary graphics slot area (rarely
used.) As long as you use enough fans and get good internal air flow (two
to four case fans) then most any case will do, so, given this qualification,
you can more or less pick a case by convenience, finish, and price ( I
picked the VERY deep Enlight EN-8950 for its nine externally accessible 5.25
inch bays, space for two 120 mm front fans, generous internal workspace,
slide-in drive rails, and price ~ $100 w/o PS.)

*****
If you look back over posts in this newsgroup since March you will see some
pretty detailed discussions of E6600 overclocking posts by 'Ed Medlin' and
E4300 by 'Phil Weldon'. I don't believe there have been many posts on E6750
experience.

Depending on how you will use the system, you might consider the cheaper
E4300 (~ $120 US ) rather than the E6600 ( ~ $227 ) or E6750 ( ~ $200 ) and
apply the money saved toward an 8800 GTS 320 MByte ( ~ $270 ) rather than an
8600 GTS 256 MB ( ~$170 US ) With my E4300/EVGA 680i/Patriot DDR2-1066/EVGA
8800 GTS 320 MByte system, the 3DMark06 scores are

E4300 @ 2.7 GHz, 8800 GTS 320 MByte @ stock, memory @ stock = ~ 8500

and

E4300 @ 3.15 GHz, 8800 GTS 320 MByte @ 640 MHz/950 MHz, memory overclocked =
~ 10,400.

The E4300 (and other E4xxx CPUs) has the advantage of requiring a lower FSB
for overclocking (2.7 GHz for the 1.8 GHz E4300 requires only a 300 MHz FSB
(9X 300 MHz = 2.7 GHz). The 2.4 GHz E6600 also requires just a 300 MHz FSB
for 2.7 GHz and 333 MHz for 3.0 GHz while a 2.66 GHz E6750 requires a 375
MHz FSB for 3.0 GHz. But for such a mild overclock as a 2.66 GHz E6750 @
3.0 GHz (only 12%) you should choose the E6750 over the more expensive
E6600. [Prices current at http://www.zipzoomfly.com , an etailer from which
I've bought most of my computer parts for the past few years.]

Were I to consider building a system for a mild CPU overclock I would go, at
this instant, with the E6750. I don't intend to replace my E4300 until a
die shrink (or with a Q6600 if I just can't restrain myself that long.) I
expect my current components to be capable of supporting the next die
shrink, FSB speed increase quad core CPU. For now I've got to learn to use
my new Vista Home Ultimate T7300 CPU notebook and think about water cooling
for my E4300 - anything to put off real work B^)

Phil Weldon

"»Q«" <boxcars.RemoveThis@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:20070904234532.66a2df67@mevrian.remarqs.net...
|I was looking to put together a C2D box, with no thought of
| overclocking, when I noticed the E6600 was slightly more expensive than
| the E6750. I figured that must be because the E6600 is easily OCable,
| and some googling and reading here confirm it. So I find myself in the
| same boat as a few years ago when I built my current box; the P4 1.6A
| was too good an OCer to pass up. I've been running it at 2133 MHz for
| five years, though it would go a bit higher.
|
| I don't OC because I enjoy it, but if it's easy I'd like to take
| advantage of the gain in performance without spending more. I'm not
| willing to do anything other than stock cooling. I will use some
| thermal goop rather than whatever cpu/hsf interface Intel ships. So, if
| I go with the E6600, is it a very good bet I can run it at 3.0 GHz with
| the stock hsf in an Antec Sonata III case?
|
| If it's a nearly sure thing (I know there are no sure things with OCing
| plans), I'll take that chance. From googling and reading some here, it
| seems a safe bet, but I'm curious to see if anyone's been /unable/ to
| get a E6600 to 3.0 without extra measures.
|
| In case anything in my proposed setup looks problematic to you, here it
| is:
|
| Antec Sonata III case, comes with 500 watt PSU
| ASUS P5K mainboard (P35 and ICH9 chipsets)
| Corsair TWIN2X2048-6400C4
| EVGA GeForce 8600GTS 256MB 128-bit GDDR3
| Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD3200AAKS 320GB 7200 RPM
| 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb
| ASUS DRW-1814BLT SATA optical drive
|
|