Core 2 Quad Q8200 O/C Performance And Efficiency
| Intel Quad-Core Test Settings | ||
|---|---|---|
| Default Settings | Overclock Settings |
| CPU | Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 | 2.69 GHz, (7x 384 MHz) 1.29V core, 1.40V FSB |
| RAM | DDR3-1333 CAS 9-9-9-24, 1.50V | DDR3-1536 CAS 6-6-5-16, 1.65V |
| Motherboard | MSI P45 Diamond LGA-1366, P45/ICH10R, BIOS 1.5 (10/10/2009) | |
| Graphics | Zotac GeForce GTX260² | |
| Hard Drive | Western Digital VelociRaptor WD30000HLFS | |
| Sound | Integrated HD Audio | |
| Networking | Integrated Gigabit LAN | |
Software | ||
| Operating System | Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate x64 SP1 | |
| Graphics | GeForce 182.08 Desktop | |
A stock FSB clock that was already near the processor’s limit made this the most disappointing overclocking experience we can remember since National Semiconductor’s Cyrix MII. Its measly 15% gain felt like a tremendous achievement, however, considering the great effort required to reach a 2.69 GHz clock frequency.
Sandra Arithmetic and Multimedia show CPU performance gains of 14 to 15 percent.
A memory bandwidth increase of 19% looks much better, but isn’t as noteworthy in a CPU overclocking guide.
Low core voltage plus high FSB voltage brings a significant penalty in power consumption, even though performance gains were mediocre at best.
An efficiency loss of 9% results from a ratio of performance to power consumption for the overclocked configuration.
Latest CPU News
- 10/02 – CPU Performance Boosted 20% When CPU, GPU Collaborate
- 10/02 – Leaked Slide Shows Intel Haswell Set for March-June 2013
- 09/02 – $100,000 If You Can Prove Quantum Computers Impossible
- 09/02 – AMD Adds FM1 CPUs Athlon II X4 638 and Athlon II X4 641
- 08/02 – Raspberry Pi Scheduled to Launch This Month
Using top end motherboards isn't really budget overclocking, a cheap p43 board is sufficient for e5200 overclocking, additionally a q9400 is only 25% more than a q8200 and overclocks to 3.5Ghz with ease
..or allows, considering different models often come off the same wafer xD
Still, I doubt the AMD-basher's will let that one rest..
I like it. I like to see how far we can push this technology as well as how to keep the idle TDP as low as possible. I think the phenom II 955 suits me the best. AMD overdrive allows you to set both preformance settings as well as the idle settings. Something were i7 failt for me.
I would like to keep cool and quiet on at all times because i dont would want a high power bill and because my computer is on for a few days in a row. So my challenge would be how can i keep the voltage and clocks very low at idle but maintain a resonable desktop preformance. However for gaming i can use some extra headroom. i like to fine tune it well.
Why the hell did you choose an 8200? That makes no sense at all, its poor overclocking performance is widely documented.
Better would be to choose something else, then have a side note saying 'do not buy this part to OC'.
if you want a cheap stable intel overclockable intel quad core look for a Q6600 or if you really want a challenge look for a Q6700, both are very good OCers but are EOLed
Strange to think its Intel that got an unfair bashing this time around. Using top-end mobos in a budget OC session is a major no-no. Using a Q8200 instead of something closer to the X4-955BE's price tag, like the Q9300, is just plain stupid.
To be honest, switching to budget mobos wouldn't have affected the outcome that much; from what reviews I've heard the MSI 770-C45 is a perfectly decent AM3 budget OC board going for a pittance and there are a few MSI and Gigabyte P35/P43 mobos in the same price range on the Intel side of things.
I need to get out of my closet and start reading these forums way more.
Thanks for a very interesting thread
(Even if criticed by some)
e5200 oc at fsb 1066 (no voltage increasing)
What would be the lifespan of the processor.