Skip to main content
Start a Conversation

Unsolved

This post is more than 5 years old

Agent_of_the_no

116 Posts

26867

March 27th, 2007 02:00

How to overclock my XPS700 in the new bios ???

Hi, I cant find how to overclock my C2D E6400 in the xps700 bios...? anyone?

pointguard1122

1.9K Posts

March 27th, 2007 03:00

With the E6400, the OCing will be the same as before.  Turn on the option to OC in the BIOS and use Ntune to push the FSB up to near 300.  Unless you have a X6800 or QX6700, you cannot change the multiplier.  Blame Intel for this, not Dell.

Agent_of_the_no

116 Posts

March 27th, 2007 12:00

I hate ntune, worst interface ever.... is there anything else?

pointguard1122

1.9K Posts

March 27th, 2007 12:00

You can use the Nvidia control panel if you use an Nvidia GPU, but it is basically the same interface.  Otherwise, you will have to upgrade to an extreme processor.  Intel locked the multipliers on all of the Core2Duo E series processors. 

Aivas47a

1.2K Posts

March 27th, 2007 14:00


Agent_of_the_north wrote:
Hi, I cant find how to overclock my C2D E6400 in the xps700 bios...? anyone?
Build your own rig with a retail motherboard with a real overclocking bios.  Any current performance Core 2 chipset -- Intel 975, Intel 965, ATI RD600, Nvidia 680 -- will do.  You'll most likely be able to crank your E6400 up to a higher level of performance than you could get in the XPS with an X6800. 
 
Check out this article:
 

scarmine

98 Posts

March 27th, 2007 22:00

I have an E6300. Is it ok to overclock it too? If yes, what are your recommendations for the speed, etc? I will be using Ntune and have installed the latest bios.

CHSIsupplier

807 Posts

March 27th, 2007 22:00

The E6300 can be overclocked like no other on the right retail board. Unfortunately, that is not the board we were given. So I would recommend just running the nTune automatic tune. I haven't found a huge benefit from the 3 hr fine tune, so I would just run the 20 minute coarse tune. Be prepared for several BSOD's...this is normal.

scarmine

98 Posts

March 28th, 2007 01:00

CHSIsupplier: Thanks. Ill give it a try

pointguard1122

1.9K Posts

March 28th, 2007 02:00

Usually you can push the FSB to 295-305.  Like previously said, it is no where near what a retail mobo would do.  The Intel chipsets really do well with the low end Core2Duos.  Hopefully our next mobo will allow a better FSB push.  These things go well over 350 on good retail boards.

winnieB

1.1K Posts

March 28th, 2007 15:00

OCing breeds system instability, so just be aware that the performance gains will probably not out weigh the inconvience of system hang ups. Unless you are just doing it for fun.
 
 
However, sometimes I wish I could OC for a few moments just to see what this thing could do unlocked.  Oh well.
 
Peace OUt,
 
kip
 
 
(the skunk is here to stay)
 
 
XPS 410
Pentium C2D E6700 2.66
2 GB @ 667mzh (2 dimms)
Dual 80GB Raptors @ 10,000 RPM in RAID 0 (silenced)
320GB hdd
160GB hdd
NVIDIA 7900GS Zalman VF-900cu
ATI TV Wonder 650 HD
Diamond 24-bit 7.1 surround, w/ dolby digital live
2407 & 2001 monitors
logitech G7 mouse, G15 keyboard

----------------------------------"GAME ON"-------------------------------

Aivas47a

1.2K Posts

March 28th, 2007 15:00


winnieB wrote:
OCing breeds system instability, so just be aware that the performance gains will probably not out weigh the inconvience of system hang ups ...
That may be true if you are talking about overclocking with Ntune, but is not true at all if you are talking about bios overclocking with a decent Core 2 motherboard.
 
Almost any lower end C2D (E6300, 6400, 6600) can run 24/7 at speeds in the range of 2.8 - 3.2Ghz with little or no increased voltage, special cooling needs, or instability.  You just need a motherboard that will support FSB speeds in the 400 - 450 Mhz range, which virtually any retail enthusiast board these days should.
 
So, depending on where you start you are looking at an enormous potential CPU performance gains, in the range of 50-75%.  And again, these are not speeds at which you would normally see an increase in system instability, unless you just get really unlucky with your components.  Another way to look at it is, with modest (for a Conroe) overclocking you can have X6800 or better performance for about $200.
 
This is the real shame about the poor overclocking of the XPS700/710 -- customers have to buy a $1000 processor to get the same performance they could have for a fraction of that cost in an open system.

winnieB

1.1K Posts

March 28th, 2007 16:00

ok, I will agree with you on that, but I still feel stongly that OCing leaves a system vunerable to hang ups etc. 

tphillips63

2.6K Posts

March 28th, 2007 17:00

I am going to have to agree with Winnie on this. Long term, over a year, lots of OC'd systems start breaking down, sometimes even before that time. I am not too concerned with the extreme CPU's because they are the best they offer and I think would validate at the two bin bump Dell allows the OC on. If you talk to people in the CPU industry two bin is always a good buffer for rated parts. This is shy I like the Dells and is the way I OC'd anyway, so two bin now plus faster RAM support, stock on video cards, is super stable and no ntune adjustments at all.

Aivas47a

1.2K Posts

March 29th, 2007 18:00

Well, overclocking is a cost/benefit decision that depends on your facts and circumstances.  It's obviously not the right approach for everyone, but for people like you and me that are unlikely to run the same system for more than 2-3 years without upgrades, I think you can gain major increases in performance without meaningful sacrifices of useful life with reasonable overclocking.  The Conroe chips are really all the same design, just labelled differently according to the speeds at which they have been tested to perform and according to what the current sales needs are (sometimes processors that could pass testing for a higher model are deliberately downclocked because that is what is needed to maximize total sales). 
 
In other words, I don't think there is any reason to think that an E6600 which runs stable (after good burn in testing)  at 3.2Ghz, with voltages and temperatures within Intel specs, has any shorter life than an X6800 running under the same conditions, and many E6600s will do just that.  Voltage and heat are what kill a chip, not speed (standard specs are moving up to 1333FSB as we speak).  Plus, in terms of that cost/benefit analysis, you could replace an E6600 twice and still have change left over as compared to buying one X6800.
 
Different strokes, and we can certainly agree to disagree on this, but my own view is that with the astonishing headroom available in most Conroe processors, coupled with the fact that so much hardware is now being designed with overclocking in mind, reasonable overclocking (emphasis again on the word reasonable) is not the risky "crash and burn your PC" kind of activity it might have been a few years ago.

winnieB

1.1K Posts

March 29th, 2007 19:00


Aivas47a wrote:
Well, overclocking is a cost/benefit decision that depends on your facts and circumstances.  It's obviously not the right approach for everyone, but for people like you and me that are unlikely to run the same system for more than 2-3 years without upgrades, I think you can gain major increases in performance without meaningful sacrifices of useful life with reasonable overclocking.  The Conroe chips are really all the same design, just labelled differently according to the speeds at which they have been tested to perform and according to what the current sales needs are (sometimes processors that could pass testing for a higher model are deliberately downclocked because that is what is needed to maximize total sales). 
 
In other words, I don't think there is any reason to think that an E6600 which runs stable (after good burn in testing)  at 3.2Ghz, with voltages and temperatures within Intel specs, has any shorter life than an X6800 running under the same conditions, and many E6600s will do just that.  Voltage and heat are what kill a chip, not speed (standard specs are moving up to 1333FSB as we speak).  Plus, in terms of that cost/benefit analysis, you could replace an E6600 twice and still have change left over as compared to buying one X6800.
 
Different strokes, and we can certainly agree to disagree on this, but my own view is that with the astonishing headroom available in most Conroe processors, coupled with the fact that so much hardware is now being designed with overclocking in mind, reasonable overclocking (emphasis again on the word reasonable) is not the risky "crash and burn your PC" kind of activity it might have been a few years ago.


Aivas47a, well put, and I agree that the conroe chips are left with plenty of "head room" for OCing, and I agree it is not going to be a crash and burn scenario we see under reasonable OCing, in most circumstances atleast, but one will still experience instablity which can be annoying and inconvient when gaming or using applications. 
 
Now that said, when considering the price differences I concede it may just be worth the risk and inconvenience to OC and save your money while still obtaining top of the line performance at half or less the cost.  If it is a case of novelty, by all means one should not stop OCing because it is fun.  But if one is doing it to save money, I wonder how often they are in and out of ntune, rebooting etc, trying to get things just right. 
 
 
XPS 410
Pentium C2D E6700 2.66
2 GB @ 667mzh (2 dimms)
Dual 80GB Raptors @ 10,000 RPM in RAID 0 (silenced)
320GB hdd
160GB hdd
NVIDIA 7900GS Zalman VF-900cu
ATI TV Wonder 650 HD
Diamond 24-bit 7.1 surround, w/ dolby digital live
2407 & 2001 monitors
logitech G7 mouse, G15 keyboard

----------------------------------"GAME ON"-------------------------------

View More

View All

No Events found!

Top