F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Core 2 quad oc?

Core 2 quad oc?

Core 2 quad oc?

H
HamishMcO
Junior Member
34
10-27-2016, 04:41 AM
#1
It's true that covering a pad on a Core 2 Quad can help achieve around a 25% overclock. This method is often used on older workstations without OC BIOS support. For your motherboard, you'd need to identify the specific pad that needs covering and ensure it's compatible with your system. The Q6600 model should work with this approach, but double-check the documentation for accuracy.
H
HamishMcO
10-27-2016, 04:41 AM #1

It's true that covering a pad on a Core 2 Quad can help achieve around a 25% overclock. This method is often used on older workstations without OC BIOS support. For your motherboard, you'd need to identify the specific pad that needs covering and ensure it's compatible with your system. The Q6600 model should work with this approach, but double-check the documentation for accuracy.

C
camchrism
Member
212
10-27-2016, 06:06 AM
#2
It allows the maximum multiplier at 9, meaning its performance relies on the default CPU capabilities. If it has around 10, this mod won't be effective at all
C
camchrism
10-27-2016, 06:06 AM #2

It allows the maximum multiplier at 9, meaning its performance relies on the default CPU capabilities. If it has around 10, this mod won't be effective at all

B
BlazeEagle
Junior Member
17
10-27-2016, 07:36 AM
#3
Wdym?
B
BlazeEagle
10-27-2016, 07:36 AM #3

Wdym?

T
ThinkStampy04
Member
65
11-03-2016, 09:22 AM
#4
It's a minor adjustment for the frontside bus, not a major scaling change. Core2 chips rely on the FSB to communicate with other parts and adjust memory and CPU speeds based on that frequency. Covering a pin might trick the board into thinking it needs a 333MHz FSB instead of 266MHz, which can boost performance. For more details, see the in-depth guide—note that the FSB calculations were incorrect earlier.
T
ThinkStampy04
11-03-2016, 09:22 AM #4

It's a minor adjustment for the frontside bus, not a major scaling change. Core2 chips rely on the FSB to communicate with other parts and adjust memory and CPU speeds based on that frequency. Covering a pin might trick the board into thinking it needs a 333MHz FSB instead of 266MHz, which can boost performance. For more details, see the in-depth guide—note that the FSB calculations were incorrect earlier.

Y
Yashirosan
Junior Member
1
11-04-2016, 05:09 AM
#5
I'm testing it now, and the CPU is showing identical readings during a R20 Cinebench test. I placed the correct pin first time it was 465, without using tape. The second attempt gave 433, which was the tape version. Edited July 15, 2020 by TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp. More details needed.
Y
Yashirosan
11-04-2016, 05:09 AM #5

I'm testing it now, and the CPU is showing identical readings during a R20 Cinebench test. I placed the correct pin first time it was 465, without using tape. The second attempt gave 433, which was the tape version. Edited July 15, 2020 by TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp. More details needed.

J
Jovani_Salami
Member
65
11-08-2016, 10:51 AM
#6
Are there any listings for 1333MT FSB CPUs? I haven’t tested this mod yet, but I think the board should be set up to recognize a 1066 FSB rather than ignoring it.
J
Jovani_Salami
11-08-2016, 10:51 AM #6

Are there any listings for 1333MT FSB CPUs? I haven’t tested this mod yet, but I think the board should be set up to recognize a 1066 FSB rather than ignoring it.

J
jsdoyle
Member
77
11-08-2016, 11:39 AM
#7
Core 2 Quad Max model listed.
J
jsdoyle
11-08-2016, 11:39 AM #7

Core 2 Quad Max model listed.