# Want to overclock my new build! (I'm new)



## Ravenas (Jul 26, 2007)

Ok, this is my first time overclocking anything when it comes to computer components. However, I built this computer to be overclocked (This is why I bought water cooling). I chose this water cooler because of a review I read on TechPowerUp.com.

Anyway, I was wanting to "safely" overclock my processor and my ram. I put safely in quotation marks because I understand that there really is no safe overclock. Anyway my system specs are in my drop down. I was wanting to overclock from 2.4GHz to around 3.0GHz.

My Bios verison is.... 12DC1-NVISTA-100R for INTEL Ver. 1.0


Please help   


Also Gigabyte made a program called EasyTune5 2007.03.09 to overclock by updating bios setting from windows. Should I use this program to overclock or just manually goto bios?


----------



## R_1 (Jul 26, 2007)

Great specs bro. There is a useful guide to read on this site  hire .So be patient and take notes of what you are doing.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 26, 2007)

I've overclocked my cpu to 2.8Ghz just by increasing the FSB and voltage. Running stable at 14-17 degrees celcius


----------



## newconroer (Jul 26, 2007)

How in the fukk does someone from Tenessee in mid summer have an ambient room temperature of fourteen degrees? You got your air conditioning on ultra high?

Anyways, mate, while the Q's aren't as flexibile as the Conroes, you should be able to push 3ghz without a voltage change, so if that's all you want to do, then cooling is not an issue.

However, Q's run hotter than most people would like, and I have a feeling you won't stop at 3ghz...noone stops at 3ghz 

Go through the guides, but don't change anything. Then come back with a list of questions and we'll see where you stand.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 26, 2007)

My advice:

Temps seem inaccurate, use coretemp or intel TAT to measure them.

When OCing, drop your ram clocks down at first. Make sure to just do the CPU first, and leave everything else low. Test with Orthos CPU tester, and make sure its stable (a highly unstable OC can hose your windows install, so take it slow)

If your cooling really is good, you can do 3.0-3.4 on that CPU, so have some fun. Just remember to stress test the system, LOAD temperatures matter a lot more than idle temps do.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 26, 2007)

my bios is not letting me do memory timings....ect its very hard to overclock on this motherboard..i dont really know what to do because i cant reach 3.0ghz without having to take my battery out to clear cmos because it freezes


----------



## R_1 (Jul 27, 2007)

Press Ctrl+F1 when entering BIOS to have all options visible.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 27, 2007)

well, ctrl+f1 didnt work...i dont understand why this bios is like this.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 27, 2007)

Ok ctrl+f1 did work...don't listen to me=P

Anyway, I managed to get 320fsb clock out of this baby...but it won't stay stable!

My computer freezes in windows after about 5 mins of running.

I did 320fsb freq, 1.47 vcore, 5-5-5-15 memory times, and instead of setting a 1:1 memory link, I unlinked the fsb and memory and set the memory freq at 800.

Any suggestions on how I can get my cpu to run stable?


----------



## R_1 (Jul 27, 2007)

You can hit 500 FSB with this mobo , so something is wrong with BIOS adjustments. Try to set Command Rate to 2T in memory section in BIOS. I think that this N680SLI motherboard has a lot of RAM adjustments and you can find some working ones. An advice - CPU voltage is too high. Keep it under 1.4V. May be you should read   this
And look on Gigabyte website for new bios. If your mobo is revision 1 then the last BIOS should be  F4 .


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Jul 27, 2007)

If he was overclocking an AMD the v-core would be fine but it is intel and i don't overclock intel (yet) Google is your friend you can find alot of info if you just take your time.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 27, 2007)

cool ill try that, again thanks for your help R1!

any other suggestions are welcomed!


----------



## hat (Jul 28, 2007)

As far as I understand, 1.6v is safe with watercooling, but I would try 1.5V for now. It's possible you hit an FSB wall. Maybe you need to drop the multi and push the FSB more.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 28, 2007)

drop to say around so somewhere around 6x multiplier maybe? with a 350fsb


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 28, 2007)

Also, my mobo is rev. 2. Currently, I haven't been able to find bios updates for 64-bit vista.


----------



## KennyT772 (Jul 28, 2007)

Bios updates have nothing to do with your operating system.
According to Gigabtye there is no bios update for your board. http://www.gigabyte.us/Support/Moth...ard&ProductID=2526&ProductName=GA-N680SLI-DQ6


----------



## Demos_sav (Jul 28, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> Also, my mobo is rev. 2. Currently, I haven't been able to find bios updates for 64-bit vista.



You won't find any (For Vista or any other OS). Bioses only come DOS compatible. But since I've seen that post I wouldn't advice you to update your bios (on your own)


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 28, 2007)

Thanks Demos, I had no idea it was DOS only.


----------



## hat (Jul 28, 2007)

Whatever the multi is now drop it to the next lowest setting and try to hit the speed you had at the faster multi... if it's stable keep pushing
wash rinse repeat


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 28, 2007)

the thing that sucks is that i have no jumpers for my mobo


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Jul 28, 2007)

Why would you need jumpers?


----------



## Namslas90 (Jul 28, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> the thing that sucks is that i have no jumpers for my mobo



Pull some off a dead HDD.(or one your not using!)


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 28, 2007)

ok...well this time my computer wouldn't even start.

i did 7X multiplier.

428fsb

1.5vcore

3-4-4-15 timings, with 2T command

disabled everything that needed to be disabled.

system wouldnt even load, just sat there and ran.


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Jul 28, 2007)

Try 4-4-4-12@2t.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 28, 2007)

Should i link my cpu and ram, do a 1:1, or should i set my ram to 800 freq?


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Jul 28, 2007)

I would do 800.I haven't overclocked a Intel for years the last intel i overclocked was a P3. Try loosening the timings and setting it at 800


----------



## R_1 (Jul 28, 2007)

There is an excellent heatpipe cooler on your mobo, but it needs good airflow too. So try to disable  fan control in BIOS and all case fans will run on max. Keep all voltages in BIOS on manual-normal except for the CPU's. Gigabyte mobos are increasing voltages on auto and it is freq. depending. When you rich some overclocked freq.  - be sure that you did it with less possible voltage on CPU, northbridge and memory. It has to be done that way  because that is the optimal operating condition with less heat dispersion for the whole system.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 28, 2007)

ok....

tried this

1.6vcore

9x 333fsb

666 freq @ 4-4-4-12 2T

Fans were at max speed, computer wouldnt boot to windows....


----------



## panchoman (Jul 28, 2007)

you may need to up the northbridge voltage a tad if you've run into a fsb wall. 1.6 v core seems preety high.. whats your max. load temp?


----------



## KennyT772 (Jul 28, 2007)

try dropping your ram as far as possible and run them at 5-5-5-15-2t when overclocking until you find your cpus max. put your cpu at the highest multi it has and start with stock voltage. raise your fsb 10mhz over stock, then run orthos for an hour on small fft's. if it passes an hour (it should with ease) bump up another 10mhz on the fsb. Repeat until it doesnt pass one hour of orthos. when it doesnt pass bump your cpu up on vcore and try it again. if it still doesnt pass try adding voltage to the chipset also. This process takes a while but will yeild the best and most stable overclock. As you get past a 333mhz fsb start going in jumps of 5mhz on the bus speed instead of 10.  

1.4vcore is the highest you should need to use! be careful of frying your cpu.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Ok, windows just booted at 2.8GHz....

Here's my setup.

1.4vcore

320 fsb

800 @ 5-5-5-15 2T

Now I'll try orthos.

Btw, my voltage goes up to 2.5


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Is there an orthos 64-bit verison?


----------



## panchoman (Jul 29, 2007)

your voltage may go up to 2.5, but you cpu needs to survive the heat. whats your load temp @2.6?


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

running stress test now


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Type: Blend - stress CPU and RAM Min: 8 Max: 4096 InPlace: No Mem: 1790 Time: 15
CPU: 2880MHz FSB: 320MHz [320MHz x 9.0 est.]
7/28/2007 7:14 PM 
Launching 2 threads...
Using CPU #0
Beginning a continuous self-test to check your computer.
Press Stop to end this test.
Test 1, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922945 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 2, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922943 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 3, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19374367 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 4, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19174369 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 5, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18874369 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 6, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18874367 using 1024K FFT length.
Self-test 1024K passed!
Test 1, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M172031 using 8K FFT length.
Test 2, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M163839 using 8K FFT length.
Test 3, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M159745 using 8K FFT length.
Test 4, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M157695 using 8K FFT length.
Test 5, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M155649 using 8K FFT length.
Test 6, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M153599 using 8K FFT length.
Test 7, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M147455 using 8K FFT length.
Test 8, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M143361 using 8K FFT length.
Test 9, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M141311 using 8K FFT length.
Self-test 8K passed!
Test 1, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M212991 using 10K FFT length.
Test 2, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M210415 using 10K FFT length.
Test 3, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M208897 using 10K FFT length.
Test 4, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M204799 using 10K FFT length.
Test 5, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M200705 using 10K FFT length.
Test 6, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M196607 using 10K FFT length.
Test 7, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M194561 using 10K FFT length.
Test 8, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M188415 using 10K FFT length.
Test 9, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M186369 using 10K FFT length.
Test 10, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M184319 using 10K FFT length.
Self-test 10K passed!
Test 1, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17432577 using 896K FFT length.
Test 2, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17432575 using 896K FFT length.
Test 3, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17115073 using 896K FFT length.
Test 4, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16815071 using 896K FFT length.
Test 5, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16515073 using 896K FFT length.
Test 6, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16515071 using 896K FFT length.
Test 7, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16297569 using 896K FFT length.
Self-test 896K passed!
Test 1, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M14942209 using 768K FFT length.
Test 2, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M14942207 using 768K FFT length.
Test 3, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M14155777 using 768K FFT length.
Test 4, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M14155775 using 768K FFT length.
Test 5, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M13969343 using 768K FFT length.
Test 6, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M13669345 using 768K FFT length.
Test 7, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M13369345 using 768K FFT length.
Self-test 768K passed!
Test 1, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M250519 using 12K FFT length.
Test 2, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M245759 using 12K FFT length.
Test 3, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M245281 using 12K FFT length.
Test 4, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M243713 using 12K FFT length.
Test 5, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M235519 using 12K FFT length.
Test 6, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M233473 using 12K FFT length.
Test 7, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M231183 using 12K FFT length.
Test 8, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M229375 using 12K FFT length.
Test 9, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M225281 using 12K FFT length.
Test 10, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M221183 using 12K FFT length.
Self-test 12K passed!
Test 1, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M291913 using 14K FFT length.
Test 2, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M286719 using 14K FFT length.
Test 3, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M282625 using 14K FFT length.
Test 4, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M280335 using 14K FFT length.
Test 5, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M278527 using 14K FFT length.
Test 6, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M274335 using 14K FFT length.
Test 7, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M270335 using 14K FFT length.
Test 8, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M266241 using 14K FFT length.
Test 9, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M262143 using 14K FFT length.
Test 10, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M260335 using 14K FFT length.
Self-test 14K passed!
Test 1, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M12451841 using 640K FFT length.
Test 2, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M12451839 using 640K FFT length.
Test 3, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M12196481 using 640K FFT length.
Test 4, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M11796481 using 640K FFT length.
Test 5, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M11796479 using 640K FFT length.
Test 6, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M11596479 using 640K FFT length.
Test 7, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M11285761 using 640K FFT length.
Self-test 640K passed!
Test 1, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9961473 using 512K FFT length.
Test 2, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9961471 using 512K FFT length.
Test 3, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9837183 using 512K FFT length.
Test 4, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9737185 using 512K FFT length.
Test 5, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9537183 using 512K FFT length.
Test 6, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9437185 using 512K FFT length.
Test 7, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9437183 using 512K FFT length.
Self-test 512K passed!
Test 1, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M339487 using 16K FFT length.
Test 2, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M335393 using 16K FFT length.
Test 3, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M331681 using 16K FFT length.
Test 4, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M329727 using 16K FFT length.
Test 5, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M327681 using 16K FFT length.
Test 6, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M319487 using 16K FFT length.
Test 7, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M315393 using 16K FFT length.
Test 8, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M311295 using 16K FFT length.
Test 9, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M308295 using 16K FFT length.
Test 10, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M307201 using 16K FFT length.
Self-test 16K passed!
Test 1, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M420217 using 20K FFT length.
Test 2, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M409601 using 20K FFT length.
Test 3, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M401407 using 20K FFT length.
Test 4, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M393217 using 20K FFT length.
Test 5, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M392119 using 20K FFT length.
Test 6, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M389119 using 20K FFT length.
Test 7, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M376833 using 20K FFT length.
Test 8, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M372735 using 20K FFT length.
Test 9, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M368641 using 20K FFT length.
Self-test 20K passed!
Test 1, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8716289 using 448K FFT length.
Test 2, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8716287 using 448K FFT length.
Test 3, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8516289 using 448K FFT length.
Test 4, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8316287 using 448K FFT length.
Test 5, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8257537 using 448K FFT length.
Test 6, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8257535 using 448K FFT length.
Test 7, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8098785 using 448K FFT length.
Self-test 448K passed!
Test 1, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7471105 using 384K FFT length.
Test 2, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7471103 using 384K FFT length.
Test 3, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7377889 using 384K FFT length.
Test 4, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7277887 using 384K FFT length.
Test 5, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7077889 using 384K FFT length.
Test 6, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7077887 using 384K FFT length.
Test 7, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M6984673 using 384K FFT length.
Self-test 384K passed!
Test 1, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M501041 using 24K FFT length.
Test 2, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M496943 using 24K FFT length.
Test 3, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M487423 using 24K FFT length.
Test 4, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M471041 using 24K FFT length.
Test 5, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M466943 using 24K FFT length.
Test 6, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M458753 using 24K FFT length.
Test 7, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M450559 using 24K FFT length.
Test 8, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M442369 using 24K FFT length.
Test 9, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M441041 using 24K FFT length.
Test 10, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M436943 using 24K FFT length.
Self-test 24K passed!
Test 1, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M580673 using 28K FFT length.
Test 2, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M573441 using 28K FFT length.
Test 3, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M565247 using 28K FFT length.
Test 4, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M557057 using 28K FFT length.
Test 5, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M544767 using 28K FFT length.
Test 6, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M540673 using 28K FFT length.
Test 7, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M532479 using 28K FFT length.
Test 8, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M524289 using 28K FFT length.
Test 9, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M522479 using 28K FFT length.
Torture Test ran 3 hours, 59 minutes 21 seconds - 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Execution halted.




Using CPU #1
Beginning a continuous self-test to check your computer.
Press Stop to end this test.
Test 1, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922945 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 2, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922943 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 3, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19374367 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 4, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19174369 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 5, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18874369 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 6, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18874367 using 1024K FFT length.
Self-test 1024K passed!
Test 1, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M172031 using 8K FFT length.
Test 2, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M163839 using 8K FFT length.
Test 3, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M159745 using 8K FFT length.
Test 4, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M157695 using 8K FFT length.
Test 5, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M155649 using 8K FFT length.
Test 6, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M153599 using 8K FFT length.
Test 7, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M147455 using 8K FFT length.
Test 8, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M143361 using 8K FFT length.
Test 9, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M141311 using 8K FFT length.
Self-test 8K passed!
Test 1, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M212991 using 10K FFT length.
Test 2, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M210415 using 10K FFT length.
Test 3, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M208897 using 10K FFT length.
Test 4, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M204799 using 10K FFT length.
Test 5, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M200705 using 10K FFT length.
Test 6, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M196607 using 10K FFT length.
Test 7, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M194561 using 10K FFT length.
Test 8, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M188415 using 10K FFT length.
Test 9, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M186369 using 10K FFT length.
Test 10, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M184319 using 10K FFT length.
Self-test 10K passed!
Test 1, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17432577 using 896K FFT length.
Test 2, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17432575 using 896K FFT length.
Test 3, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17115073 using 896K FFT length.
Test 4, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16815071 using 896K FFT length.
Test 5, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16515073 using 896K FFT length.
Test 6, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16515071 using 896K FFT length.
Test 7, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16297569 using 896K FFT length.
Self-test 896K passed!
Test 1, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M14942209 using 768K FFT length.
Test 2, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M14942207 using 768K FFT length.
Test 3, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M14155777 using 768K FFT length.
Test 4, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M14155775 using 768K FFT length.
Test 5, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M13969343 using 768K FFT length.
Test 6, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M13669345 using 768K FFT length.
Test 7, 5300 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M13369345 using 768K FFT length.
Self-test 768K passed!
Test 1, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M250519 using 12K FFT length.
Test 2, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M245759 using 12K FFT length.
Test 3, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M245281 using 12K FFT length.
Test 4, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M243713 using 12K FFT length.
Test 5, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M235519 using 12K FFT length.
Test 6, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M233473 using 12K FFT length.
Test 7, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M231183 using 12K FFT length.
Test 8, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M229375 using 12K FFT length.
Test 9, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M225281 using 12K FFT length.
Test 10, 460000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M221183 using 12K FFT length.
Self-test 12K passed!
Test 1, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M291913 using 14K FFT length.
Test 2, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M286719 using 14K FFT length.
Test 3, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M282625 using 14K FFT length.
Test 4, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M280335 using 14K FFT length.
Test 5, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M278527 using 14K FFT length.
Test 6, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M274335 using 14K FFT length.
Test 7, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M270335 using 14K FFT length.
Test 8, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M266241 using 14K FFT length.
Test 9, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M262143 using 14K FFT length.
Test 10, 380000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M260335 using 14K FFT length.
Self-test 14K passed!
Test 1, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M12451841 using 640K FFT length.
Test 2, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M12451839 using 640K FFT length.
Test 3, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M12196481 using 640K FFT length.
Test 4, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M11796481 using 640K FFT length.
Test 5, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M11796479 using 640K FFT length.
Test 6, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M11596479 using 640K FFT length.
Test 7, 6500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M11285761 using 640K FFT length.
Self-test 640K passed!
Test 1, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9961473 using 512K FFT length.
Test 2, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9961471 using 512K FFT length.
Test 3, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9837183 using 512K FFT length.
Test 4, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9737185 using 512K FFT length.
Test 5, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9537183 using 512K FFT length.
Test 6, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9437185 using 512K FFT length.
Test 7, 7800 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M9437183 using 512K FFT length.
Self-test 512K passed!
Test 1, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M339487 using 16K FFT length.
Test 2, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M335393 using 16K FFT length.
Test 3, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M331681 using 16K FFT length.
Test 4, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M329727 using 16K FFT length.
Test 5, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M327681 using 16K FFT length.
Test 6, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M319487 using 16K FFT length.
Test 7, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M315393 using 16K FFT length.
Test 8, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M311295 using 16K FFT length.
Test 9, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M308295 using 16K FFT length.
Test 10, 340000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M307201 using 16K FFT length.
Self-test 16K passed!
Test 1, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M420217 using 20K FFT length.
Test 2, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M409601 using 20K FFT length.
Test 3, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M401407 using 20K FFT length.
Test 4, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M393217 using 20K FFT length.
Test 5, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M392119 using 20K FFT length.
Test 6, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M389119 using 20K FFT length.
Test 7, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M376833 using 20K FFT length.
Test 8, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M372735 using 20K FFT length.
Test 9, 270000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M368641 using 20K FFT length.
Self-test 20K passed!
Test 1, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8716289 using 448K FFT length.
Test 2, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8716287 using 448K FFT length.
Test 3, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8516289 using 448K FFT length.
Test 4, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8316287 using 448K FFT length.
Test 5, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8257537 using 448K FFT length.
Test 6, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8257535 using 448K FFT length.
Test 7, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M8098785 using 448K FFT length.
Test 8, 9000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7998783 using 448K FFT length.
Self-test 448K passed!
Test 1, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7471105 using 384K FFT length.
Test 2, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7471103 using 384K FFT length.
Test 3, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7377889 using 384K FFT length.
Test 4, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7277887 using 384K FFT length.
Test 5, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7077889 using 384K FFT length.
Test 6, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M7077887 using 384K FFT length.
Test 7, 11000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M6984673 using 384K FFT length.
Self-test 384K passed!
Test 1, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M501041 using 24K FFT length.
Test 2, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M496943 using 24K FFT length.
Test 3, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M487423 using 24K FFT length.
Test 4, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M471041 using 24K FFT length.
Test 5, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M466943 using 24K FFT length.
Test 6, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M458753 using 24K FFT length.
Test 7, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M450559 using 24K FFT length.
Test 8, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M442369 using 24K FFT length.
Test 9, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M441041 using 24K FFT length.
Test 10, 210000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M436943 using 24K FFT length.
Self-test 24K passed!
Test 1, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M580673 using 28K FFT length.
Test 2, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M573441 using 28K FFT length.
Test 3, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M565247 using 28K FFT length.
Test 4, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M557057 using 28K FFT length.
Test 5, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M544767 using 28K FFT length.
Test 6, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M540673 using 28K FFT length.
Test 7, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M532479 using 28K FFT length.
Test 8, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M524289 using 28K FFT length.
Test 9, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M522479 using 28K FFT length.
Test 10, 180000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M516095 using 28K FFT length.
Torture Test ran 3 hours, 59 minutes 21 seconds - 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Execution halted.


Looks like everything is running fine at 2.8 GHz


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Jul 29, 2007)

looks good what are your temps and v-core?


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Can't figure my temps out, don't know the right program to use. None of the programs in the sticky thread seemed to work for me.


Vcore= 1.4 volts


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Jul 29, 2007)

Try speed fan 4.32? It says it  can be used under 64 bit vista 
http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/System-Info/SpeedFan.shtml


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Ok, this is using SpeedFan:


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Also, I'm not sure if this matters but...

My ram usage meter is staying at a constant 43%.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Actually got my system to stay stable at 1.375 volts instead of 1.400v.

Now to run orthos.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

My cores are gaining alot of temperature. Maxed thus far at 42 degrees Celsius for core 0. Other cores are in a descending temperature.

So core 0 is around 105 degrees fahrenheit. That's pretty damn hot!


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Jul 29, 2007)

My AMD gets alot hotter when i overclock it.That isn't bad. You are using water cooling i am using air and you have quad i have dual core. Those are some low temps. I think you could go higher without temps holding you back.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

In that case, what temp, in Celsius, is too high?


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> In that case, what temp, in Celsius, is too high?



What Stepping is it B3 or G0 ?


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

I'm not familiar with the term "stepping", sorry I'm new to this. 

Anyway orthos stats and temperatures at these specs:

1.375 vcore

9x multiplier

320 CPU FSB

800 Memory Frequency @ 5-5-5-15 2T timings.


Type: Blend - stress CPU and RAM Min: 8 Max: 4096 InPlace: No Mem: 1790 Time: 15
CPU: 2880MHz FSB: 320MHz [320MHz x 9.0 est.]
7/29/2007 12:29 AM 
Launching 2 threads...
Using CPU #0
Beginning a continuous self-test to check your computer.
Press Stop to end this test.
Test 1, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922945 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 2, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922943 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 3, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19374367 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 4, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19174369 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 5, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18874369 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 6, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18874367 using 1024K FFT length.
Self-test 1024K passed!
Test 1, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M172031 using 8K FFT length.
Test 2, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M163839 using 8K FFT length.
Test 3, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M159745 using 8K FFT length.
Test 4, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M157695 using 8K FFT length.
Test 5, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M155649 using 8K FFT length.
Test 6, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M153599 using 8K FFT length.
Test 7, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M147455 using 8K FFT length.
Test 8, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M143361 using 8K FFT length.
Test 9, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M141311 using 8K FFT length.
Self-test 8K passed!
Test 1, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M212991 using 10K FFT length.
Test 2, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M210415 using 10K FFT length.
Test 3, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M208897 using 10K FFT length.
Test 4, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M204799 using 10K FFT length.
Test 5, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M200705 using 10K FFT length.
Test 6, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M196607 using 10K FFT length.
Test 7, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M194561 using 10K FFT length.
Test 8, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M188415 using 10K FFT length.
Test 9, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M186369 using 10K FFT length.
Test 10, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M184319 using 10K FFT length.
Self-test 10K passed!
Test 1, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17432577 using 896K FFT length.
Test 2, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17432575 using 896K FFT length.
Test 3, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17115073 using 896K FFT length.
Test 4, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16815071 using 896K FFT length.
Test 5, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16515073 using 896K FFT length.
Test 6, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16515071 using 896K FFT length.
Torture Test ran 1 hours, 0 minutes 29 seconds - 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Execution halted.


Using CPU #1
Beginning a continuous self-test to check your computer.
Press Stop to end this test.
Test 1, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922945 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 2, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19922943 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 3, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19374367 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 4, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M19174369 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 5, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18874369 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 6, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18874367 using 1024K FFT length.
Test 7, 4000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M18474367 using 1024K FFT length.
Self-test 1024K passed!
Test 1, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M172031 using 8K FFT length.
Test 2, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M163839 using 8K FFT length.
Test 3, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M159745 using 8K FFT length.
Test 4, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M157695 using 8K FFT length.
Test 5, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M155649 using 8K FFT length.
Test 6, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M153599 using 8K FFT length.
Test 7, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M147455 using 8K FFT length.
Test 8, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M143361 using 8K FFT length.
Test 9, 800000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M141311 using 8K FFT length.
Self-test 8K passed!
Test 1, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M212991 using 10K FFT length.
Test 2, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M210415 using 10K FFT length.
Test 3, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M208897 using 10K FFT length.
Test 4, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M204799 using 10K FFT length.
Test 5, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M200705 using 10K FFT length.
Test 6, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M196607 using 10K FFT length.
Test 7, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M194561 using 10K FFT length.
Test 8, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M188415 using 10K FFT length.
Test 9, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M186369 using 10K FFT length.
Test 10, 560000 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M184319 using 10K FFT length.
Self-test 10K passed!
Test 1, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17432577 using 896K FFT length.
Test 2, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17432575 using 896K FFT length.
Test 3, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M17115073 using 896K FFT length.
Test 4, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16815071 using 896K FFT length.
Test 5, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16515073 using 896K FFT length.
Test 6, 4500 Lucas-Lehmer iterations of M16515071 using 896K FFT length.
Torture Test ran 1 hours, 0 minutes 29 seconds - 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Execution halted.

Temperatures of all cores (4) never rised above 43 degrees Celsius.


Any advice on how to reach 3.0 GHz would be greatly appreciated at this point!


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

Its in CPU-Z but try not to go over 60c load

and to get 3GHz 333X9 might need to up the volts


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Should I consider lowering memory timings?


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

well its better to leave them at cas 5 so you can get the cpu stable 1st then you can lowering mem tim cuz you might get an error and you'll have to be there is it the mem or the cpu plus you'll need more volts for cas 4 over cas 5 cuz im running cas 5 with 1.9v 1000Mhz


----------



## Mussels (Jul 29, 2007)

lower timings = faster/more unstable

higher timings = slower/more stable

Steppings is just like another model number, not all Q6600's are the same (G0's overclock like mad, while a B3 runs a ton hotter)


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

you sould be able to push it to 3.2Ghz or higher useing that cpu with watercooling you need to up the volts on the NB to 1.5v, vcore to 1.4, cpu vtt uped 5/10 volts run ram and fsb unlinked fsb at 1465 and try your ram at 900


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

I have the q6600 Kentsfield model.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Live OR Die said:


> you sould be able to push it to 3.2Ghz or higher useing that cpu with watercooling you need to up the volts on the NB to 1.5v, vcore to 1.4, cpu vtt uped 5/10 volts run ram and fsb unlinked fsb at 1465 and try your ram at 900




What multiplier should I use?


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> I have the q6600 Kentsfield model.



 all the Q's are Kentsfield look at the pic


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

Kentsfield are hard to oc and you cant push them as high as conroe chip and all cpu are different same people mite hit 3Ghz and other only 2.8Ghz and 680i MB arnt all that good when it comes to ocing Kentsfield chips


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Ah, the box says SL9UM...From what I understand SL9UM means B3. So yes, I have the B3 verison. However, from my understanding the heat issues between the 2 don't come into play on the higherend motherboards due to better heatsinks. Also, watercooling plus 6 fans help.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

leave your multiplier on 9X you should be able to get to 3GHz just try uping the cpu vtt 5volts and NB to 1.5 mosty it the NB that holds you back


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

when you said NB/PCIE, did you mean +0.15V?


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

333 X 9 for 3GHz try 1.45v on the v-core if its stable you can lower it untill its un-stable then back up 1


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

tried 333x9 1.45v, 900mem freq

system didn't boot past bios/boot menu selection screen


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

man I hate Gigabyte mobos to many setting in the bios you have to set 

cuz did you set all of them or is there some on auto ? volts, pci-e mhz, nb etc.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

try HT Voltage at +0.2V North Bridge at +0.2V South Bridge at +0.2V and then try fsb at 360 and mem at 900 the North Bridge get realy hot so don't up it to much


----------



## Mussels (Jul 29, 2007)

keep the temps in C if you can.

42C is fine, these chips would run at 55C at stock clocks on the stock cooler, in warm weather. If you keep it at or below 50C, you're quite safe.

If you can run your ram lower while OCing thats the best bet, even if your ram is at 533MHz DDR, you know any instabilities/noboots are caused by the CPU/overclock alone. then you repeat the test with the CPU lower and the ram up, and find a happy medium between the two later.

Edit: yeah you have a B3. B3's run hot, having water you can counter that. You on water, will OC like a G0 would on air. But hey, in the end its just as fast.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

DOM_ATI_X800XL_PCI-E said:


> man I hate Gigabyte mobos to many setting in the bios you have to set
> 
> cuz did you set all of them or is there some on auto ? volts, pci-e mhz, nb etc.




As far as voltage settings go it is as follows:

System Voltage Control: Manual
DDR2 Voltage Control: Normal
NB/PCIE Voltage: Normal
SB/PCIE Voltage: Normal
FSB Voltage Control: Normal
SB Standby Voltage: Normal
CPU Voltage Control: 1.37500V


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

try this but your cpu clock ratio as 9x and leave your ram as it is try your cpu voltage as 1.4/1.45


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Ok...this is weird.

This is my setup.

I used 1.5vcore

Used all setting you recommended Live or Die. Would boot past bios selection on 360 fsb but wouldn't make it into windows. However, with 333 fsb, wouldn't boot past bios selection.


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> As far as voltage settings go it is as follows:
> 
> System Voltage Control: Manual
> DDR2 Voltage Control: Normal
> ...



normal means there at stock

DDR2 Voltage Control: +.4 on the mem which should be 1.8v + .4 = 2.2v

NB/PCIE Voltage: +0.05v

SB/PCIE Voltage: Normal
FSB Voltage Control: Normal
SB Standby Voltage: Normal
CPU Voltage Control:1.5v


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

The specs I used in bios were prior to your picture bios reply Live or Die.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

try running lower fsb till you find a stable pont and try uping your ram volts a little whats your stable pont you have reached and on what volts


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

320 fsb with 1.375vcore, 800 mem freq


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

try 366 fsb with 1.4 vcore, 800 mem so what when you get to windows loading bars it restarts or you get a bluescreen


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

> Quad Core Overclocking
> 
> GIGABYTE GA-N680SLI-DQ6
> 
> ...



http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2936&p=4

seems the mobo cant oc the Q good 

what bios are you using ?


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

nope didn't make it past bios select/boot up select screen


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

when i get past windows loading it goes black screen and restarts before the vista icon pops up


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

all 680i board are different even the same models its just luck if you get one that overclocks beter then the other


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

try working up by 10 say 320 fsb to 330 fsb


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Once again, didn't make it past bios select screen.


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> Once again, didn't make it past bios select screen.



Did you read this 
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=409412&postcount=72


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Yeah, I just don't want to accept defeat so easily.


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Ok, I just jumped my cmos and when I get bios select screen it's a blinking line on black screen


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> Yeah, I just don't want to accept defeat so easily.



 well you tryed more vots and it doesnt boot so its the mobo you can try but unless theres a new bios that lets you get more of an oc your going to have to live with 320  I know it sucks but i'll trade you lol  

do you have the latest bios?


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jul 29, 2007)

try uping the NB volts abit more and try if it boots in at 322 fsb because if 320 its stable try uping by 5 just to see if it still runs stable


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Ok, I'm in at 322fsb, 1.4vcore


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

System isn't stable at 322!!

Ok I'm just going to hold off at 320 for now


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Although, right now I'm overclcoked at 2.88 GHz at 1.325vcore!

I'm happy with these results.


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

do you have the latest bios ?


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

i believe so, rev 2


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Support/Motherboard/BIOS_Model.aspx?ProductID=2553

Is that the latest bios? When I try to install it it says it doesn't work. However, I'm pretty sure my bios is up to date.


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

yeah it is its the only one that have out, I guess you have to wait and see if they come out with one that lets you oc the Q's more


----------



## Ravenas (Jul 29, 2007)

Well, one of the key reasons I bought this 680i mobo was because it said, "Optimized for Quad". It is pretty discouraging when your not able to overclock quad processors to at least 3.0 GHz on this mobo.


----------



## DOM (Jul 29, 2007)

you could get 3.2Ghz if you got a Q6700


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 1, 2007)

I'm still having a problem overclocking my quad core processor. Right now I'm wishing I didn't buy! Why? Because I'll sit at 2.9 GHz OC (which is max for 680) and it will crash during games. When I say crash, the game will completely freeze. I don't know if it's my memory or my cpu...What should I do?


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 2, 2007)

Also, whenever I overclock to 2.8 GHZ (9x 320fsb) the system will run fine for 3 hours in Orthos...However, when I play a game it crashes within 30 mins (freezes and restarts). Why is this happening?

2.8 GHz

320fsb

1.4500vcore

All options set to +.20

800 memory freq

timings are 5-5-5-15 2T

Temps are always fine. Below 30 degrees celcius.


Why is this happening?


----------



## strick94u (Aug 2, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> I'm still having a problem overclocking my quad core processor. Right now I'm wishing I didn't buy! Why? Because I'll sit at 2.9 GHz OC (which is max for 680) and it will crash during games. When I say crash, the game will completely freeze. I don't know if it's my memory or my cpu...What should I do?



Some of the early 680i mother boards have a problem overclocking quad core cpus rma your board and hope the new one fixs the problem.this is a known problem and they all hide behind the it work at stock speeds bull shit.contact the maker and ask


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 2, 2007)

Well they have a problem overclocking past the 320fsb on a 9x multiplier. However, my machine runs stable untill I play a game... Oh well, they need to come out with some bios updates!


----------



## Mussels (Aug 2, 2007)

if its orthos stable but not game stable, have you tested the ram and PSU? I've never seen or used a quattro before, but with an 8800Ultra and a quad core, you could be overloading one rail in there without realising it.


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Aug 2, 2007)

I don't think he is overloading but that could happen. How is that water cooling kit working for you?


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 2, 2007)

Seems to be working fine.


----------



## vega22 (Aug 2, 2007)

i think its just fsb blackholes, all the nf600i mobos seem to have them. i have some from 250/310 and another 378/395  puzzled me for a bit but once i got past it mine ran fine.


scrap the x9 multi, drop to x8 and try 400 on 1.45v under water you should have no worries, i run mine on 1.45v under a freezer 7 pro and it only hits 52c on each core after a while running orthos, run your ram at stock speeds and timings for now and see if it works.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 2, 2007)

Well, when trying to overclock to 2.88 GHz with a fsb multiplier of either 8 or 7 it wouldn't work...I think it is just the motherboard that I have. I have read alot of reviews saying that 680i quad boards have alot of problems overclocking quad processors atm...However, they will be releasing bios updates soon hopefully.

Secondly, what exactly is memory frequency, and how do memory timings work?


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 2, 2007)

Also, my machine seems to be running alot more stable at 2.66 GHz


----------



## Mussels (Aug 3, 2007)

My advice would be aim for a low OC, even 3GHz. just get what you can out of it now (particularly out of the memory as well) to hold you over until a new bios comes out.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 4, 2007)

So far it's been running very smooth at 2.66 GHz OC. However, I was wanting to know what I can do to make my memory run faster with OC? Anyhow, any advice is very appreciated!


----------



## Mussels (Aug 4, 2007)

you could try running the memory in 1T mode for a big performance boost, however the odds are fairly low on that working with DDR2


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 6, 2007)

So other than that, I can just increase the memory's frequency and the timings?


----------



## kenjin (Aug 6, 2007)

i have OCZ SLI ready memory DDR2 1066 EPP ready.  i have it Clock it at 900mhz with 4-4-4-8 1T timming. at 2.68volt. still not done with it yet. when i get home tonight i'm going to try to raise the Mhz a little more or tight the timming more. but so far is running stable at this timming.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 6, 2007)

What is your ram's stock specs?


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Aug 6, 2007)

I have Geil ultra RAM DDR2 800 running at 903 4-4-4-4-5@2t stock is DDR2 800 4-4-4-4-12 2t
I am running 2.1v. Have you set your timings different yet?If not the only way to do it is lower them and run memtest for a few hrs or overnight.Just keep doing that till you get errors and you are at the voltage you feel safe with. That is if you want it stable.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 6, 2007)

As of right now, my timings are..

900 @

4-4-4-12 1T

.275 volts added


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 7, 2007)

Well it stayed stable for a while at 320fsb when I uped my fsb voltage. However, eventually it crashed again!


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 8, 2007)

I have tried for 2 hours to get a stable OC over 318 fsb with a 9x multiplier.. Still no luck, release a BIOS update Gigabyte!


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Aug 9, 2007)

Every time i update my BIOS i get less of an overclock.Maybe it is just my luck.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 9, 2007)

This just saddens me!

q6600/GA-N680SLI-DQ6 overclocking sorrows.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 9, 2007)

Evga  680I t1 and  680I a1 boards overclock quads much better than the 680I board you have because unlike yours they were designed with a better power phase system, you are going to be lucky if you hit 2.9 ghz with a b3 stepping chip a G0 chip might have gotten you to 3.0. I see you keep posting 680I boards won't overclock a quad which is untrue It depends on the revision. A bios update won't help you the original 680I boards are physically different than the new ones. Sell it and buy a e6850 because your version was designed to oc a dual not a quad and you will hit 4.0ghz atleast.Your board with a dual will hit a 475+ FSB.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 9, 2007)

Actually I've read that the stepping hasn't effected the OC that much on the q6600 (though I may need to do some more homework); however, stepping does effect temperatures dramatically. On the otherhand, 680i boards actually do have a plague of problems with this processor. The eVGA boards you mention are a small selection of 680i mobos.

EDIT: What I have read is that...The stepping has a direct effect on how much voltage the cpu will need in order to be OCed. With that said, my mobo supports lots of high voltage settings.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 9, 2007)

I managed to reach that 320fsb with a 2.88 GHz OC; running good. Going to go mess with the vcore. I'll keep you guys updated!


----------



## Chewy (Aug 9, 2007)

trt740 said:


> Sell it and buy a e6850 because your version was designed to oc a dual not a quad and you will hit 4.0ghz atleast.Your board with a dual will hit a 475+ FSB.



 shit sorry to hear that but I thin you should eventually do what he said.. or try selling the mobo since it dont like quads... 2.9ghz aint bad it will do ya for a while, but it might bottleneck nexted gen dx10 cards. (8900's or 9800's whatever thier going to be called).


----------



## Mussels (Aug 9, 2007)

G0's OC better because of the low temps.

THe B3 Q6600 OC'd high, but it needed water/TEC to get those clocks, the G0 manages the 200-300MHz higher at the same temps, thats it.

680i boards hit an FSB wall with G0's, its a bit annoying.

Myself, the Q6600 G0 is the highest my mobo can take (Cant take E6850/quad 1333 FSB chips) so i've ordered one, should be due very soon


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

As far as B3 stepping goes, pretty much speaks for itself. I'm not sure if that's awful or good. I'm going to try some lower voltages as well.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

As far as B3 stepping goes, pretty much speaks for itself. I'm not sure if that's awful or good. I'm going to try some lower voltages as well.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> Actually I've read that the stepping hasn't effected the OC that much on the q6600 (though I may need to do some more homework); however, stepping does effect temperatures dramatically. On the otherhand, 680i boards actually do have a plague of problems with this processor. The eVGA boards you mention are a small selection of 680i mobos.
> 
> EDIT: What I have read is that...The stepping has a direct effect on how much voltage the cpu will need in order to be OCed. With that said, my mobo supports lots of high voltage settings.




No you are wrong all the 680I board are made by and at Nvidia. They are just marketed and dressed with different types of fans, heatpipes etc by the seller like EVGA, Asus, GiGabyte and each company can write or tweak the bios but phyically they are the exactly the same with very minor cosmetic changes made by the seller. The original design was flawed and had to be revised by Nvidia. Not just Evga's boards but all the orginal 680I designs and revisions. Your board is one of those boards. I know this because the newer 680I boards will take a B3 stepping chip to 3.3ghz on average and will take a G0stepping to 3.6ghz or higher. The older boards can make it to 2.9ghz on average just like yours. Nvidia remade the reference boards and if your box and manual doesn't say supports Quad core overclocking it doesn't. The newer 680I boards are physically different than the older revisions. Keep beating your head against the wall your board will not go any higher with that chip. Call Gigabyte and you will see.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Mussels said:


> G0's OC better because of the low temps.
> 
> THe B3 Q6600 OC'd high, but it needed water/TEC to get those clocks, the G0 manages the 200-300MHz higher at the same temps, thats it.
> 
> ...




Where did you get that info that 680I boards hit a wall with G0 stepping chips? They without a doubt do not. Unless you think 475 to 521 FSB is a wall.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Mussels said:


> G0's OC better because of the low temps.
> 
> THe B3 Q6600 OC'd high, but it needed water/TEC to get those clocks, the G0 manages the 200-300MHz higher at the same temps, thats it.
> 
> ...




Your board will do over 520 FSB with a G0 stepping dual core chip. I'm not sure what your talking about. It is reguarded as one of the best overclockers made and is a hybrid of a 590 chipset and a 680I chipsets. It is actually slightly inferior to a true 680i board but is a straight monster overclocker. If thats the case why would you say a 680I would hit a wall with a G0 stepping chip because it won't. The newer revisions are second really to only the p35 chipsets.

It looks to me like it supports G0 stepping e6850and Quads chips aswell

*P5N-E SLI from Asus web page*.

Specification 

*CPU LGA775 Socket Intel® Quad-Core/CoreTM Extreme/Pentium D /Pentium 4/Celeron CPU processors*Compatible with Intel® 06/05A/05B processors
Intel® EIST/EM64T/Hyper-Threading Technology/C1E/ TM1/TM2Support Intel® next generation 45nm Multi-core CPU
** Please update the latest BIOS to support Intel 45nm CPU*

Chipset NVIDIA nForce® 650i SLITM 
*Front Side Bus **1333/1066/800/533MHz 
(** available when CPUs are ready for 1333MHz FSB*) 
Memory Dual channel memory architecture
4 x 240-pin DIMM sockets support up to 8GB DDR2 800/667/533 
non-ECC/ Unbuffered memory 
Expansion Slots 2 x PCI Express x16
- Single VGA mode: x16 (Default)
- SLI mode: x8, x8
1 x PCI Express x1
2 x PCI (PCI 2.2)

Storage - 2 x Ultra DMA 133/100/66/33
- 4 x Serial ATA 3.0 Gb/s
- Support RAID0, 1, 0+1, 5, and JBOD 
- 1 x External Serial ATA 3.0 Gb/s (SATA On-the-Go) 
LAN Gigabit LAN featuring AI Net2
Marvell 88E1116 PHY

Audio Realtek ALC883 6-channel CODEC
Audio Sensing and Enumeration Technology
Multi-Streaming
1 X Coaxial S/PDIF out ports on back I/O

IEEE 1394 Supports 2 IEEE 1394a connector onboard (1 in back + 1 on board) 
USB Supports up 8 USB2.0 ports 
Overclocking Features - AI Overclocking (intelligent CPU frequency tuner)
- ASUS CPU Lock Free
- Precision Tweaker: 
- vCore: Adjustable CPU voltage at 6.25mv increment
max. 1.6V
- vChip: 4-step Chip voltage control
adjust Chip voltage max. 0.55V
- vDIMM: 8-step DRAM voltage control
adjust DRAM voltage max. 0.6V
- SFS (Stepless Frequency Selection)
- FSB tuning from 200MHz up to 750MHz at 1MHz increment
- PCI Express frequency tuning from 100MHz up to 131MHz at 1MHz increment
- CPU Multiplier
- ASUS C.P.R.(CPU Parameter Recall)

Special Features ASUS Q-Connector
ASUS O.C. Profile
ASUS Fanless Design
ASUS PC Probe2
ASUS Q-Fan2
ASUS MyLogo2
ASUS Update  
BIOS 4 Mb Flash ROM, AWARD BIOS, PnP, DMI2.0, WfM2.0, SM BIOS 2.3
ASUS EZ Flash 2,ASUS CrashFree BIOS 2 
Manageability WfM 2.0, DMI 2.0 , WOR by Ring , 
WOL/WOR by PME, WO USB/KB/MS, PXE, RPL & AI Net2 
Internal I/O Connectors 1 x 24-pin ATX Power connector
1 x 4-pin ATX 12V Power connector
1 x Chassis Intrusion
1 x CPU + 2 Chassis FAN connectors
1 x Floppy disk drive connector
1 x CD audio in connector
1 x 1394a connector
2 x USB connector supports additional 4 USB ports
1 x Front panel connector (AAFP)
System panel connector
1 x COM Port connector
1 x S/PDIF out connector 
Back Panel I/O Ports 1 x Parallel port
1 x 1394a connector
1 x S/PDIF Out port (Coaxial)
1 x PS/2 Keyboard port (purple)
1 x PS/2 Mouse port (green)
1 x LAN(RJ-45) port
4 x USB 2.0/1.1 port
1 x External SATA 
6-Channel Audio I/O port 
Accessories 1 x SLI bridge
1 x 2-in-1 ASUS Q-Connector Kit (Retail version only)
1 x UltraDMA 133/100/66 cable
1 x FDDe cable
2 x SATA cables
2 x SATA power cable
1 x 2-port USB2.0 module
1 x I/O Shield
User's manual 
O/S Compatibility Windows Vista/XP 
Support CD Drivers
ASUS Update 
Anti-virus software (OEM version)
ASUS PC Probe II
NVIDIA RIS (Remote Installation Service) application 
Form Factor ATX Form Factor, 12”x 9”(30.5cm x 22.9cm)


----------



## Mussels (Aug 14, 2007)

trt740 said:


> It looks to me like it supports G0 stepping e6850and Quads chips aswell
> 
> *P5N-E SLI from Asus web page*.



I've got that board. i've tested and researched it. It boots a quad G0, but 3GHz is about its limit, 3.1Ghz while prime/orthos stable, generally wont start up on a reboot.

All these boards (650i and 680i FIRST REVISION) will BOOT a quad, but NOT overclock them.

Oh and if you look further in, it can take G0 1066 FSB (like i have) or dual core 1333 FSB, excluding the E6850. (Go to the CPU support page, and the E6850 is missing. E6750 is the highest 1333 Dual supported)
This board has very spotty support, the P5n32-E SLI has the entire range covered.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Mussels said:


> I've got that board. i've tested and researched it. It boots a quad G0, but 3GHz is about its limit, 3.1Ghz while prime/orthos stable, generally wont start up on a reboot.
> 
> All these boards (650i and 680i FIRST REVISION) will BOOT a quad, but NOT overclock them.
> 
> ...




That is all bios related the e6850 is not physically different than a e6700 all they did was dropped the multiplier from 10 to 9 and upped the FSB from 1066 to 1333. They are a better binned chips but they are not physically different. I bet if you put a e6850 in that board and set the FSB to 9x1333 it would work just fine. It might not identify it correctly but it would work. Tatty one has one and is putting a e6850 in it today.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

My particular motherboard has problems with my particular processor at hitting anymore than 333 fsb, so I've read. Most haven't been able to get past 320 with this processor. Also, most eVGAs had horrible fsb walls at the start of their release.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

Also why is my motherboard only sold as an open-box OEM item on newegg.com now? The thing just came out, Tiger Direct had videos for it and everything....

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128037R&Tpk=GA-N680SLI-DQ6


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

Ok to end this thread once and for all, would it be better for me to:

1. Buy a new motherboard (eVGA A1, or PK5)
2. Buy a G0 q6600 chip.
3. The hell with it, 2.86 GHz is fast enough for a damn quad.


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Aug 14, 2007)

to hell with it 2.86ghz  is fast enough for a damn quad


----------



## Mussels (Aug 14, 2007)

I'd say P35 AND a G0 

it all depends if you need the performance, i use a lot of dual core apps so i want 3.2Ghz for performance there, but as quad core games come out it will matter less.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> My particular motherboard has problems with my particular processor at hitting anymore than 333 fsb, so I've read. Most haven't been able to get past 320 with this processor. Also, most eVGAs had horrible fsb walls at the start of their release.



I'm not sure what your talking about you act as if gigabyte actually makes that motherboard they don't they just sell it . All 680I motherboards are manufauctured at nvidia. The 333 your talking about is exactly what I'm talking about the early 680I boards from all the sellers won't overclock a quad core chip past a 333 fsb or 2.9 ghz . The new revisions will because of a upgraded/increased power system. Your board 680I and egva 680I AR /TR revisions most likely were made exactly the same. Also 2.8 is very fast anyway for a Quad thats like having 4 slightly overclocked e6700 chips linked in your system nothing will bottle neck with that and all that on board chip memory. If you do anything sell your quad and get a e6850 your board will overclock that chip past 4ghz.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

Awesome, thanks for your help trt740. Sometimes I wish I could swap processors out easily. I don't have unlimited funds so my computer purchases are about to come to a halt. Anyhow, again thanks much. You gave me alot of insight on how this motherboard actually works and how it was made.. Also thanks to everyone else in this post who helped me try to overclock over 333fsb!! Haha, thanks much!


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> Awesome, thanks for your help trt740. Sometimes I wish I could swap processors out easily. I don't have unlimited funds so my computer purchases are about to come to a halt. Anyhow, again thanks much. You gave me alot of insight on how this motherboard actually works and how it was made.. Also thanks to everyone else in this post who helped me try to overclock over 333fsb!! Haha, thanks much!




If you put your quad on ebay you will get 300+ or more for it. You could then buy a e6850 for as low as 285.00 at zipzoomfly. I would sell the quad if it were me because the quads two other cores are not being used right now and by the time they are you will want something else. Now if you could get two of the cores to say 3.4 to 3.6ghz (which I realize you cannot) I would say keep it. If you buy a e6850 and oc it to 3.8ghz to 4.0ghz it will actually be faster for the next 6 months or so in just about everything, because the quads two other core are not being used and the two cores that are, are running 700 mghz or more behind the dual core e6850. Still  your quad, even if it just uses two cores, the way you have it overclocked, would still be like having two 6700/e6800 with 8 mb of onboard memory and thats not bad either. This is a great problem to have really. If I didn't tell you your motherboard will overclock the hell out of dual cores. What I was told was when Nvidia made the first 680I board the quads were not available yet for testing and thats when the snafu in the first revision 680i boards happened. I was told, however, that those 680I board were designed specifically to overclock dual cores and man do they ever my old 680I nf63 tr took a a e6600 on air to 4005ghz. imagine what it could do with a G0 stepping chip.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

Yeah, that's an option. However, if I put it on ebay, what could be my reasoning for selling it?


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> Yeah, that's an option. However, if I put it on ebay, what could be my reasoning for selling it?




State you didn't know your motherboard revision doesn't support quad core overclocking and that nothing is wrong with the chip but you have to sell it because of a issue with your motherboard or you can simply state it wasn't compatible with your motherboard. Then take a picture and post the date you bought it and guarantee it won't be doa. Start your bidding at 285.00 with 11.00 shipping to guarantee you will have enough for the e6850. It will sell most of the chips on ebay are selling in that price range. I'm in the same boat you are in a sense I sold a e6600 thinking my new e6700 would out perform it ,at the lower end it does running at alot lower voltage but at the higher end it actually needs more voltage. I'm selling it and might get a e2160 which can reach 3.6ghz for 80 bucks or I might get a e6850 or quad . I am going to lose about 15.00 on the deal because of the ebay fees. I will make what I payed for the e6700 before ebay gets it's hand on my money but o well. I could have gotten a e6700 like Domique got, which does 4.7 ghz, but I didn't. Thats what happens when you roll the dice.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

Should I try to take off the thermal paste excess on the processor or just leave it as is?


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> Should I try to take off the thermal paste excess on the processor or just leave it as is?



Clean it with a Qtip and alcohol and make it look new  (because really it is new) so that shouldn't be hard. Be honest in your listing people can tell when your honest and if your product looks new say it does and back it up with pictures. If it doesn't sell well then your out 4.00 and you have a quad core that will run like 4 e6700/e6800 chips in your computer. If it does sell e6850 here I come . It is a win win as I see it.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

Well, I'll think about it. I need to get some more thermal paste for my processor if I decide to take it out. On the other hand, I'm pretty happy with my performance thus far. I might just wait 6 months and see how much the 2.66 GHz quads drop in price. Either way (like you said) I'm not in a bad position.

EDIT: I might just say the hell with all this processing and try to get a TB of hardrive space, I have too much data on all the computers in my house.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 14, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> Well, I'll think about it. I need to get some more thermal paste for my processor if I decide to take it out. On the other hand, I'm pretty happy with my performance thus far. I might just wait 6 months and see how much the 2.66 GHz quads drop in price. Either way (like you said) I'm not in a bad position.
> 
> EDIT: I might just say the hell with all this processing and try to get a TB of hardrive space, I have too much data on all the computers in my house.



Don't wait to long if you decide to sell your quad because when AMD's new chips hit the market intel quads are going to drop in value like crazy.


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

Wow, I'm getting my volts down very low. Surprising myself!


----------



## erocker (Aug 14, 2007)

That fan must of flown out the case and exit'd the atmosphere by now too!  It's also good to see you are using liquid nitrogen on your SB, and your 12+ rail must consist of a drunk hamster on a broken wheel!


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 14, 2007)

That's speedfan for ya!


----------



## LiveOrDie (Aug 15, 2007)

lol if your +12v rail was that low your computer wouldn't even turn on


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 15, 2007)

I don't think speed fan works well with vista 64 bit...


----------



## trt740 (Aug 15, 2007)

erocker said:


> That fan must of flown out the case and exit'd the atmosphere by now too!  It's also good to see you are using liquid nitrogen on your SB, and your 12+ rail must consist of a drunk hamster on a broken wheel!



No that was funny stuff 
That fan must of flown out the case and exit'd the atmosphere by now too! *It's also good to see you are using liquid nitrogen on your SB, and your 12+ rail must consist of a drunk hamster on a broken wheel!*__________________


----------



## Ravenas (Aug 15, 2007)

What can I say, I'm working on a custom case mod that will serve as a computer/air transportation.


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Aug 15, 2007)

erocker said:


> That fan must of flown out the case and exit'd the atmosphere by now too!  It's also good to see you are using liquid nitrogen on your SB, and your 12+ rail must consist of a drunk hamster on a broken wheel!



You think that is fast here is mine 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



Also speed fan just doesn't work right under XP even the newest.
Try the 4.33 beta 9 maybe it will fix some problems it did for me.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Aug 15, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> I don't think speed fan works well with vista 64 bit...



im running x64 vista speed fan dosn't work will all mbs didn't with my asus and my eVGA only reads 3 voltages i like everest ultimate more and you can make up a sidebar with all your voltages and temps


----------



## HeavyH20 (Sep 1, 2007)

The original 680i chipset (version C00) had quad issues. All the newer 680i boards use D00 rev chipsets and do not present FSB issues with quads.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 3, 2007)

HeavyH20 said:


> The original 680i chipset (version C00) had quad issues. All the newer 680i boards use D00 rev chipsets and do not present FSB issues with quads.



great clocks man. makes my OC look weak.

Interested in that cooler, i can get it for about $450 au - PM me with your impressions if you ahve the time


----------



## Ravenas (Oct 11, 2007)

I'm considering flashing my bios In hopes of reaching 333 FSB on my mobo. Thus, I was wondering if anyone knew any bios that is compatible with my mobo? I've heard a lot about FSB walls on this mobo but I refuse to stop there, so now I'm on a mission to flash the bios. ANY help / tips would be very very appreciated.

Also, I've been looking around on biosman.com and I'm getting a back up chip and some tools (that way I'll be prepared for this project).


----------



## Ravenas (Oct 11, 2007)

Bump, posted this kinda late last night.


----------



## Namslas90 (Oct 12, 2007)

Check with AthlonX2, he may be able to MOD yer BIOS.


----------



## 3991vhtes (Oct 14, 2007)

Ravenas said:


> I'm considering flashing my bios In hopes of reaching 333 FSB on my mobo. Thus, I was wondering if anyone knew any bios that is compatible with my mobo? I've heard a lot about FSB walls on this mobo but I refuse to stop there, so now I'm on a mission to flash the bios. ANY help / tips would be very very appreciated.
> 
> Also, I've been looking around on biosman.com and I'm getting a back up chip and some tools (that way I'll be prepared for this project).




biosman.com is a great website. thats where i got my bios for my asus a7v-vm


----------

