From 3.16 GHz to Almost 4 GHz
Overclocks Without Voltage Increase
FSB1333 speed will take the 2.53 GHz E7200 to 3.16 GHz immediately—you don’t have to modify many settings. Should your motherboard offer automatic adjustment of processor settings, it will also automatically introduce a slight voltage increase. This worked well on an MSI P45 Diamond, and on Asus and Gigabyte motherboards using the same chipset.
This time we took the processor to the maximum clock speed we’d reached with Core 2 Duo processors without voltage increase—3.4 GHz. Consequently, we set the FSB speed from 333 MHz to 360 MHz, and received an effective 3.41 GHz clock speed at FSB1436 according to CPU-Z 1.46.
Overclocking without increasing voltage is safe as long as the overclocking settings are reliable. We recommend checking system stability using demanding tools such as Prime95 or the burn-in feature of SiSoft Sandra.
3.6 GHz (FSB1520)
We couldn’t reach 3.6 GHz reliably without modifying the voltage settings, as the automatic configuration of the MSI P45 Diamond didn’t increase the voltage sufficiently. So we manually selected 1.35 V, which CPU-Z reported to be at 1.328 V. At this point we operated the system at a 380 MHz base clock speed, which equals FSB1520. The system started properly, and was as stable as it could be—we experienced no problems whatsoever during several hours of play with the test machine.
- overclocking ,
- core ,
- 2 ,
- E7200
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
Why didnt you bench the processor at the same speed as the 8500 to make things nice and easy?...
I have an E8500 overclocked to 3.8GHz using the 400MHz FSB and DDR2-800 Nanya dual channel memory running 1:1. It is the fastest ever and it barely gets warm. It is my home PC. I also have an office PC running an E7200 at stock speeds and that is nice and fast (quiet too). I must say Intel's new 45nm chips are really excellent vfm, fast and ecologically-friendly. Well done Intel! You can find my configs and benchmarks under the picture at http://www.jacobsm.com/index.htm#rngimg
You moan about how lame the E5200 is then fail to even bench it to prove your point. You also forgot to say that quite a few people can't afford the extra ~€50 to buy a E7200 over a E5200, or that they'd probably have to spend a similar additional amount on an even better performance mobo to eke out the higher FSB needed to effectively OC a E7200.
Yes, more FSB is good, but it costs money as the combination of a FSB1066 CPU and a low multiplier means you need a performance mobo that can run stable at FSB1600 to get the E7200 to a speed the high-mult, low-FSB E5200 can achieve at a measly 302MHz FSB (FSB1208 quad-pumped) - something even many cheapie boards can achieve (with FSB1333 compliance being considered the entry level more and more now).
And I'm surprised that you need 1.40v+ to keep the E7200 stable at 3.8GHz - my E5200 is stable up to 3.75GHz at just 1.30v, and I'm nowhere near finished OCing it. The E5200 is based on low-binned silicon dies and thus is on average more power-hungry (and hot/wasteful), requiring relatively higher voltages to achieve the same speeds as the middle-binned E7XXX (which is in turn inferior to the high-bin E8XXX). Just as a comparison the Intel safety spec says voltages over 1.3625v are not at all good for a 45nm chip's health (although extreme cooling mitigates this somewhat)...
The only thing that sucks about this processor is that it does not have virtualization.Otherwise, it's cheap, and easily overclockable.
For proper overclock you would have to reduce the 9.5 multiplier to 9 or 8 as most motherboards have trouble with the half multi.