# Intel q6600 go temp help please



## Sxx (Apr 26, 2010)

Hello guys and ladies.
This is my first ever pc { sad i know } i got it for my 16th birthday,  

i was running the stock cooler that came with my q6600, then my dad bought me a akasa AK  955 HEAt sink and fan...  

my friend in school gave me this program because before i was having trouble freezing then when i got my new cooler it was great now,  but when he saw my temps he said my chip is to hot. I am scared to play games on it for more than 30minutes. I have not overclocked my chip and plan not to..  he said my tjmax i should set at 110 ???...............

please help me please


----------



## DrPepper (Apr 26, 2010)

Temps look fine.


----------



## Sxx (Apr 26, 2010)

so i am safe to play games then. ???? 

do i have to set mt tjmax to 110 to be safe please

thank you benjamin


----------



## DrPepper (Apr 26, 2010)

Sxx said:


> so i am safe to play games then. ????
> 
> do i have to set mt tjmax to 110 to be safe please
> 
> thank you benjamin



TJmax is the hottest your cpu will get before it starts to throttle itself or is damaged. You can't set your TJmax it's a set value. My max temperature for a q6600 is 80degree's even though the TJMax is 110 degrees.


----------



## a_ump (Apr 26, 2010)

Those temps are fine. The q6600 can run up to 71.6 degrees celcius, so roughly 72 degrees. Even then i've ran mine plenty above that, in the 80's when i was seeing how far i could overclock. TJmax value really isn't that important, its just used by an application to tell you how far you are from reaching your limits, but the q6600's should be 100 according to the author of the application "Realtemp".


----------



## Sxx (Apr 26, 2010)

thank you all for your replys.

i never knew anything it was just my friend telling my dad my pc is getting to hot and i shouldn`t use it... i am only allowed to keep it on for 30minutes then he makes me turn it off,   

Thank you benjamin


----------



## DrPepper (Apr 26, 2010)

Sxx said:


> [url]http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/8210/25335009.th.jpg[/URL]
> 
> thank you all for your replys.
> 
> ...



Nah it's definately fine at those temps.


----------



## Sxx (Apr 26, 2010)

thank you all when my dad gets in i will make him read all your replys and maybe he will let me use it more thank you soo much my friend is a idiot now ^.^
i also noticed why does sometime each number on the cores are different??

what is a good cooler not expensive one remember i only do a paper round and get £15 a week..


----------



## a_ump (Apr 26, 2010)

your friend is probly going by the old rule of thumb, "keep your CPU under 60 degree". which there's nothing wrong with that but there's no reason to turn off your computer when your around that area lol. most enthusiasts quit using that rule once Intel started releasing specific details for their CPU's. I personally "like to keep a CPU under 60 degrees" but if it goes over its no reason to panic.

Click this and show your dad if he argue's with you about it. its the official Intel Specification's for your q6600 and its limits.


----------



## DrPepper (Apr 26, 2010)

Sxx said:


> thank you all when my dad gets in i will make him read all your replys and maybe he will let me use it more thank you soo much my friend is a idiot now ^.^
> i also noticed why does sometime each number on the cores are different??
> 
> what is a good cooler not expensive one remember i only do a paper round and get £15 a week..



save up and try get something like a thermalright Ultra 120 extreme. I had that for my Q6600 and it was amazing.


----------



## a_ump (Apr 26, 2010)

Jesus Dr. Pepper, lol don't break his bank, he's only on stock remember. Xigmatek s1283 is fine for my q6600@ 3.4ghz, 1.39v. and its a good bit cheaper than a TRUE, though not quite as good, but most def good enough for stock clocks. Plus it'll be good enough incase he decides to overclock in the future, but won't break the bank for nothing if he doesn't.


----------



## DrPepper (Apr 26, 2010)

a_ump said:


> Jesus Dr. Pepper, lol don't break his bank, he's only on stock remember. Xigmatek s1283 is fine for my q6600@ 3.4ghz, 1.39v. and its a good bit cheaper than a TRUE, though not quite as good, but most def good enough for stock clocks.



I guess since he isn't oc'ing then that might have been a bit extreme. I remember I got mine for £25 though not sure how much they cost now.


----------



## mosheen (Apr 26, 2010)

get a coolermaster 212 plus, should be cheap.


----------



## Sxx (Apr 26, 2010)

Xigmatek's Dark Knight S1283

my dad purchased it for me online i have to pay him off £6 a week ^.^

we bought it new for £22 and £2 postage..

and thank you all for all your help i now can play as much as i want to now ^.^ 

i`m really excited about getting this cooler now 

my motherboard is asus p5q deluxe hope it fits it well and we have a antec 900 case.. will out power supply tagan 1000w be enough still we have 2x 4870x2, 8gig corsair ddr2 ram, 128gb ssd hdd


----------



## Sxx (Apr 27, 2010)

Hello Guys

we bought this thermal paste this morning is it ok to use with our black knight hdt1283

Arctic Cooling MX-2 Thermal Paste Non Silver formula 4g


----------



## brandonwh64 (Apr 27, 2010)

MX-2 is a good paste! you shouldn't have any issues


----------



## neoreif (Apr 27, 2010)

Yup! MX-2 is a good thermal paste to apply! Would keep your temps low with that Xigmatek cooler! Just remember to seat the cooler properly and spread the paste evenly and your good to go!

BTW, hang around the forum and I guarantee you that you'd learn more than Temps, paste and coolers! Welcome to TPU too!


----------



## Sxx (Apr 27, 2010)

Thank you all ever so much, i will stay around.. might not post alot because i don`t know really anything about computers liek you guys... i am good with bmx`s though 

thank you once again benjamin


----------



## Sxx (Apr 29, 2010)

Here is my results with that xigmatek 1283v black knight,  

Me and my dad had lots of fun installing this it was funny.. he got a black eye now the xigmatek fell of the desk while he was unplugging the pc and hit him in the face 

well installed now are these temps alot better now

benjamin


----------



## DRDNA (Apr 29, 2010)

Sxx said:


> [url]http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8770/54870341.th.jpg[/URL]
> 
> Here is my results with that xigmatek 1283v black knight,
> 
> ...



Looking good ...now run a bench test like 3Dmark vantage and see what your temps are under load.


----------



## Bo$$ (Apr 29, 2010)

dude i have a Q6600 @ 3000MHZ with akasa AK-965 Heatsink im getting around 48 degrees using MX-2 paste and have using OCCT for 40mins never goes above 48C. try dropping your voltage, as my brothers Q6600 with the same setup had a CPU voltage of 1.18V which allowed it to run at 40C full load, with less voltage less heat is produced, at the cost of stability as you are not interested in overclocking this should not matter,just a case of lowering it to 1.2V or 1.22V to lower your temps more, your temps werent really worrying to begin with.


----------



## Sxx (Apr 29, 2010)

temps while running 3dmark vantage







temps running prime95  small fft.

plus i have overclocked my cpu now it is 3.0mhzs i read it on here how to do it 

Thank you all ever so much and my dad calum said thank you also 

for taking the time to help me thank you


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Apr 29, 2010)

Nice temps. welcome to TPU. If you stick around you will be dreaming of a i7 980x@4+ghz and Watercooling along with watercooled 5970's


----------



## Bo$$ (Apr 30, 2010)

Sxx said:


> [url]http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/229/81171806.th.jpg[/URL]
> 
> temps while running 3dmark vantage
> 
> ...



Good For you mate those are very nice temps


----------



## a_ump (Apr 30, 2010)

Sxx said:


> [url]http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/229/81171806.th.jpg[/URL]
> 
> temps while running 3dmark vantage
> 
> ...



no problem, this is what TPU's all about. Learning, teaching, and helping others with technology . And as POSpc said, stick around, there's tons to learn here and we're a very friendly community as you've noticed


----------



## DrPepper (Apr 30, 2010)

Yeah you should stick around. You'll learn loads.


----------



## ERazer (Apr 30, 2010)

temps r great  push that thing to 3.4


----------



## DRDNA (Apr 30, 2010)

Sxx said:


> [url]http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/229/81171806.th.jpg[/URL]
> 
> temps while running 3dmark vantage
> 
> ...




VERY RESPECTABLE TEMPS!!! Now from what I see you have some overclocking headroom if you desire!


----------



## Sxx (Apr 30, 2010)

idle temps at 3.6ghzs   400x9 cpu ratio 





full load prime 95 then i ran 3dmark vantage here are the full load temps


I must say my pc does feel very fast indeed now very fast 

I feel all excited and i cant describe the other feeling i won`t go any higher i think it fast enough now 

i turned up all my antec 900 fans to full now   

i love this website and you guys for giving me the knowledge and courage too


----------



## ERazer (Apr 30, 2010)

Sxx said:


> [url]http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/4666/idlep.th.jpg[/URL]
> 
> idle temps at 3.6ghzs   400x9 cpu ratio
> 
> ...



u sir got a good chip and great job OCing   

Now try 3.8 hehe


----------



## Sxx (May 2, 2010)

DRDNA said:


> VERY RESPECTABLE TEMPS!!! Now from what I see you have some overclocking headroom if you desire!





ERazer said:


> temps r great  push that thing to 3.4





DrPepper said:


> Yeah you should stick around. You'll learn loads.



thank you all 

i have ordered another fan to put on the back of the heatsink i will cable-tie it or use a band to hold it in place 

I`m scared to OC it any higher              my asus p5q deluxe came with a mini asus fan i have attached it to the heat pipes it said for use with a passive cooler or water cooler.


----------



## unclewebb (May 2, 2010)

Here's a fully loaded Q6600 running hot as hell.







It hasn't even started thermal throttling yet because Intel considers this temperature to be OK.  If your CPU ever runs too hot the OK word in RealTemp will change to LOG.  That will mean that at least one thermal throttling episode has been logged.  As long as you keep it under that temperature you are fine and it will continue to run at full speed.

When overclocking, you will run into stability issues long before you ever run into temperature issues.  As long as your computer is stable and not thermal throttling, you don't have to give the core temperatures a second thought.

Edit: And this is a sign that you've crossed that line and gone too far.






The word HOT means that thermal throttling is in progress and your CPU is not running at full speed.  That's no good.
I like testing these features so you guys don't have to worry.


----------



## Sxx (May 2, 2010)

unclewebb said:


> Here's a fully loaded Q6600 running hot as hell.
> 
> http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/8119/heattest.png
> 
> ...



Wow that is hot ^.^  

thank you mr unclewebb for the testing
 Most i have hit is 62c core temp across all 4 cores...  May i ask does your q6600 still work though ????   

thank you for taking the time to post that and to all the other people that have replied and gave advice/knowledge thank you benjamin


----------



## Sxx (May 2, 2010)

so TJMAX 100C is really alot higher before it thermal cuts down ???


----------



## a_ump (May 2, 2010)

Unclewebb!! woot, yea Sxx that's the guy to listen to forsure. btw, congrats on your OC, surpassed my max of 3.4ghz on this mobo and you've just started oc'ing. See nothing to her


----------



## unclewebb (May 3, 2010)

Sxx said:


> May i ask does your q6600 still work though ????



It did still work long after those screen shots were taken.  It didn't seem to make any difference.  I sent that Q6600 to a friend in Australia 6 months or so ago and I haven't heard any complaints so I assume that it's still working fine.  Whenever something stops working, you usually hear about it.  I think he went and abused it with more voltage than I ever gave it.  I think it's more important to keep the voltage reasonable and within the Intel specs.  Core temperature doesn't seem to be a big issue.

The thermal throttling point is 100C for a Q6600 - G0 stepping where the multiplier will start to rapidly cycle back and forth between 9 and 6 which slows the CPU down which helps to cool it.  The thermal shutdown temperature isn't until 125C to 130C so you can see that Intel has a lot of confidence in their CPUs.


----------



## a_ump (May 4, 2010)

thanks, didn't know that. now ima run my CPU at 3.8 with idle temps of 64 and load 85 celcius


----------



## LifeOnMars (May 4, 2010)

a_ump said:


> thanks, didn't know that. now ima run my CPU at 3.8 with idle temps of 64 and load 85 celcius



 My thoughts exactly a ump


----------



## Sxx (May 4, 2010)

unclewebb said:


> It did still work long after those screen shots were taken.  It didn't seem to make any difference.  I sent that Q6600 to a friend in Australia 6 months or so ago and I haven't heard any complaints so I assume that it's still working fine.  Whenever something stops working, you usually hear about it.  I think he went and abused it with more voltage than I ever gave it.  I think it's more important to keep the voltage reasonable and within the Intel specs.  Core temperature doesn't seem to be a big issue.
> 
> The thermal throttling point is 100C for a Q6600 - G0 stepping where the multiplier will start to rapidly cycle back and forth between 9 and 6 which slows the CPU down which helps to cool it.  The thermal shutdown temperature isn't until 125C to 130C so you can see that Intel has a lot of confidence in their CPUs.



Unclewebb thank you for clearing that up sir thank you they sure do take some heat them chips  i dont care about temps anymore like you said if it gets to hot i will notice it shutting down if it doesn`t do that then dont worry 



a_ump said:


> thanks, didn't know that. now ima run my CPU at 3.8 with idle temps of 64 and load 85 celcius



race you to 4ghzs  i will try it when i get in from school tonight 4ghzs and beyond lol


----------



## Mussels (May 4, 2010)

unclewebb said:


> It did still work long after those screen shots were taken.  It didn't seem to make any difference.  I sent that Q6600 to a friend in Australia 6 months or so ago and I haven't heard any complaints so I assume that it's still working fine.  Whenever something stops working, you usually hear about it.  I think he went and abused it with more voltage than I ever gave it.  I think it's more important to keep the voltage reasonable and within the Intel specs.  Core temperature doesn't seem to be a big issue.
> 
> The thermal throttling point is 100C for a Q6600 - G0 stepping where the multiplier will start to rapidly cycle back and forth between 9 and 6 which slows the CPU down which helps to cool it.  The thermal shutdown temperature isn't until 125C to 130C so you can see that Intel has a lot of confidence in their CPUs.



why dont you send ME CPU's


----------



## a_ump (May 4, 2010)

lol i was jk'ing SXX. 3.4ghz is as high as i can go on this board. It's only CPU voltages are 5,10,15% percent of stock voltage increases, and i already require 15% increase to get 3.4ghz stable. Temps are fine...just won't go any faster without more volts. when loaded i'm only at 1.35v so if i ever get a Gigabtye UD3R or something then i'll get it faster with more juice . mite start shopping for one now actually lol


----------



## unclewebb (May 4, 2010)

Intel CPUs are rated to take a lot of heat and still run reliably.  If you are overclocking, you will need to run them a lot cooler to maximize your overclock while maintaining stability.  The above Q6600 could also run reliably at 3.2 GHz but I couldn't run that speed at those temperatures.  As the speed goes up, you will be forced to keep the heat down or you will lose long term stability.  All CPUs and especially the Core 2 based CPUs follow this pattern.  

The original 45nm Core i7 CPUs seem to be able to overclock reliably even up into the 90C range.  You won't be able to get a maximum overclock out of a Core 2 CPU while running at that temperature.

That's why you don't have to be too concerned about an exact temperature number when overclocking.  Just run them as cool as possible and as long as your CPU is stable then you won't be anywhere near the Intel thermal specifications.  Overclocking will force you to run your CPU cooler to get the maximum out of it.  An overclocked Core 2 will either error out in Prime95 when it gets too hot or it will simply reboot.



> why dont you send ME CPU's



I don't think I got a very good deal for that Quad.  I lost two cores because I traded it for an E6600 and then I lost some MHz and some cache by trading the E6600 for an E4300.  Collecting data to make RealTemp better isn't cheap.


----------



## mankind (May 5, 2010)

But Intel have stated that the TJmax for the 65nm Q6600 is 90°C not 100°C.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/intel-dts-specs,news-29460.html






So I'd enter 90°C into Coretemp/Realtemp as the TJMax.

Or just use Speedfan as that uses 90°C as per Intel's spec.


----------



## unclewebb (May 6, 2010)

You need to read the fine print of Intel's big news release at their IDF Conference.  Those numbers are not TJMax.  They are TJ target and are completely meaningless.  They admit in this document that actual TJMax may be different than the numbers listed.  In many CPUs I tested, these numbers weren't even close to actual TJMax.

The page of the document you posted was so ridiculous that when programmers and users and myself complained, Intel released a second document to "fix" some of their errors.  The programmer of Core Temp also ignored this document.

Use whatever TJMax makes you happy but you're better off picking a number out of a hat compared to using any numbers from the document that you posted.

The original poster has a Q6600 - G0 stepping which I tested.  TJMax wasn't anywhere close to 90C.  Actual TJMax for Core 2 and Core 3 was closer to 105C or 106C


----------



## niko084 (May 6, 2010)

I have plenty of stock clocked Q6600's that run in the high 80's low 90s on stock intel coolers on intel boards with fast good fans...

Your temps are solid


----------



## Sxx (May 6, 2010)

Thank you, i left mine at what ever the realtemp set it to i trust them more


----------



## unclewebb (May 6, 2010)

Here's the formula that all software uses:

Reported Temperature = TJMax - Digital Sensor Reading

You don't have to be a math major to see the motivation for Intel to release some low ball TJ Target numbers.  If TJ Target is 10C less than the actual TJMax and users adjust TJMax lower in RealTemp, they'll create what appears to be a cool running CPU.  The result, less complaints about hot running CPUs.

It was a great plan but they got a little carried away when they released the above document.  The first line that shows an E6000 with a TJ target of 70C is nice but it is 20C less than the actual TJMax for the E6400 and E6600 B2 stepping CPUs that I tested.  When they updated that document, after asking me what my number was, they decided to split the difference and they used a TJ Target of 80C which is still 10C less than the actual TJMax.  

I had already lost faith in getting an honest answer by that time.  When I noticed that they were interchanging TJ Target and TJMax; I decided to take their flashy PR presentations with a grain of salt.  They've never had the guts to publicly release any meaningful engineering data about the temperature sensors they use.


----------



## mankind (May 6, 2010)

Ahhhhh ok matey


----------



## mankind (May 6, 2010)

How do I go about calibrating my Q6600 then unclewebb?  Something you can help me with good sir?


----------



## mankind (May 6, 2010)

If it helps here my CPU sensor test and cool down test using P95 blend (is this correct, should I have use small FFT's?)






Thanks mate


----------



## overclocking101 (May 6, 2010)

your Q6600 is far better than my Q6600!! I need 1.37V just to run at 3.5GHZ!! nice cpu man! just remember overclocking is like an addiction like a drug once you get the itch its hard to stop


----------



## Hayder_Master (May 6, 2010)

don't worry about temps, INTEL say the 65nm cpu's max temp between 60c-65c so keep it under 70c will be fine


----------



## unclewebb (May 6, 2010)

mankind: When calibrating, for maximum accuracy, you need to run Prime95 - Small FFTs.  It does an excellent job of equally loading each core which is needed to see how the 4 cores compare.  Does CPU-Z report your CPU as a B3 or G0 stepping?  Post another cool down test using Small FFTs and I'll recommend a calibration for you.  When uncalibrated, many Q6600 CPUs follow a very similar pattern with TJMax of Core 2 actually being 5C higher than the default TJMax for Core 0/Core 1.  There's a strong possibility that Intel did this deliberately to help prevent all 4 cores from reaching the thermal throttling point at the exact same time.  Throttling only one core at a time is usually enough to control heat so offsetting TJMax slightly from one core to the next maintains maximum performance without excessive throttling all at once.

hayder.master: The Intel specification number you posted can only be accurately measured by cutting a groove into the top of the heat spreader of your CPU and mounting a thermocouple at the geometric center.  That's the Intel recommended method to measure that.  The average user is not going to do that to their CPU so for them, that Intel spec is meaningless.  There is no software that can accurately measure this temperature without hacking up your CPU.

That's why Intel added core temperature sensors to their CPUs and located them at the hottest spots on each core.  The hottest spot on the core when running a stress testing program like Prime95 can be 25C hotter than the above measured temperature.  As long as your CPU is not thermal throttling, it can still be running within spec.

RealTemp reports the status of the thermal throttling bit directly.  In the Thermal Status area of RealTemp, OK means that your CPU is running within spec.  LOG means that at least one thermal throttling episode has been logged since you powered on your computer.  HOT means that your CPU is presently thermal throttling.  The best part about this bit is that it is stored in the CPU and even a millisecond of throttling can trigger this bit and leave a record of what happened.  You don't need to have RealTemp running at the time.  If you start RealTemp after a thermal throttling episode, it will check this bit and immediately report it as LOG even if your CPU has now cooled off.  You can run RealTemp after a game or after some heavy use and it will tell you if it ever reached the thermal throttling point.

If it shows OK then everything is OK and as long as your computer is 100% stable then there isn't any need to worry about your CPU's temperature.


----------



## mankind (May 6, 2010)

unclewebb said:


> mankind: When calibrating, for maximum accuracy, you need to run Prime95 - Small FFTs.  It does an excellent job of equally loading each core which is needed to see how the 4 cores compare.  Does CPU-Z report your CPU as a B3 or G0 stepping?  Post another cool down test using Small FFTs and I'll recommend a calibration for you.  When uncalibrated, many Q6600 CPUs follow a very similar pattern with TJMax of Core 2 actually being 5C higher than the default TJMax for Core 0/Core 1.  There's a strong possibility that Intel did this deliberately to help prevent all 4 cores from reaching the thermal throttling point at the exact same time.  Throttling only one core at a time is usually enough to control heat so offsetting TJMax slightly from one core to the next maintains maximum performance without excessive throttling all at once.



Ok, small FFT's :-







It's a G0 Q6600 running at 3.6Ghz 1.37v actual.


----------



## unclewebb (May 6, 2010)

These sensors have two types of error.  Differences in TJMax and slope error.  Slope error means that the further you get away from the Intel calibration point, the more these sensors will start to wander and either read a little too high or a little too low.

By running Small FFTs and getting your CPU core temperature as high as you did, you have got to the point where these sensors have almost no slope error so the differences in the 4 cores at full load is all due to differences in how Intel sets TJMax.  The default TJMax for a Q6600 - G0 that I recommend is 100C.  Your G0 is exactly like the G0 I tested and I came to the conclusion that actual TJMax is closer to 105C on the second CPU (core 2 and core 3).

I would adjust TJMax to 100, 100, 105, 105.  I believe that adjustment will give you very accurate core temperatures at full load.  The theory behind this calibration is that when you have 4 cores all sitting very close to each other, all covered by the same heatsink and all running the same code, the core temperature for all 4 cores is going to be identical.  Heat transfer is very efficient.  

When there is a large difference in load from core to core you can have instances where the peak core temperature of one core can be different than the core that it is sitting beside but when both cores of a dual core are fully loaded, the majority of difference you see is sensor error and not a difference in actual temperature.

After this first calibration step, now you have to look at the slope error issue at idle.  Some of your sensors likely read too high while others read too low at idle.  Based on the data you've shown me so far, all I can do is guess at this.  If at idle your actual core temperature across your 4 cores is 50C, you could use a negative calibration factor on core 0 to reduce its reported temperature, a similar positive calibration factor on core 1 to increase its temperature, core 2 looks fine if you are using the correct TJMax of 105 and core 3 would need a calibration factor about twice as big as core 0 or core 1 and it would need to be positive to bring it up to 50C.

After doing this the best test is to then go into your bios and lock your computer at 6x266 ~1600 MHz and drop your core voltage as low as it can go and then boot up and compare your reported core temperature to your water temperature if you are water cooled or to your air temperature with your case open.  This can give you some idea how accurate your calibration is.  Depending on what type of cooler you are using, you can tell if this calibration is accurate or out to lunch.

Do I recommend calibrating inaccurate and poorly documented sensors.  Not really.  Will a calibration make these sensors 100% accurate from idle to TJMax?  No, that's impossible since these sensors have too many issues.  The recommended calibration might make your temps a little more accurate but it involves a lot of guessing and assumptions.  Most users are probably better off realizing that these sensors were never designed to be used for accurate temperature monitoring.  Some CPUs are better than others at getting reasonably accurate data out of them while many 45nn Quads border on the impossible.

I don't worry too much about temps any more.  Run your CPU as cool as possible and don't let it thermal throttle and it will run just fine.


----------



## mankind (May 6, 2010)

Nice one matey, thanks a bunch


----------



## Sxx (May 7, 2010)

Dropped mine done to 3.4ghz,  And cleared my cables in my antec case cable tied them and put some more mx-2 on it temps dropped by 10c now idle now at 32c and max load 46c


----------



## mankind (May 7, 2010)

You water cooled?


----------



## Sxx (May 7, 2010)

No sir i put another fan and tied it to my xigmatek 1283v so i have two fans pulling air through it, Then i cabled tied all my cables so they are not in the way this time they was a mess before, 
its running at 3.4ghz with 1,28 vcore voltage, plus i reapplied my tim-mx-2 again...


----------

