What Is A Safe Voltage For My CPU?

[Clunk]

This question comes up a lot, along with "what is a safe voltage for x".

The short answer is that once you start to go out of the Intel guidelines, there is no "safe" voltage.

Anything over the recommended voltage and you potentially risk damaging the CPU - as long as you know this and are happy to proceed, then all is good.

In reality, 65nm CPUs can often take a lot of punishment. 45nm CPUs tend to degrade quicker and there are other contributing factors that can and will damage or kill a CPU, and among those are too high VTT or CPU PLL voltage. I've had a few CPUs now that just wouldn't overclock very well with any stability after plying them with added VTT or PLL

Excessive heat and inadequate cooling, coupled with your over volt may also degrade a CPU over time, so keep it as cool as possible.

I would say that if you are just benching for benching's sake, then voltage isn't so much of an issue, but for 24/7 use, I would always recommend to keep the VTT and CPU PLL at stock, and the CPU voltage under 1.4 (this is just my personal preference).

Another thing to keep in mind if you are chasing a 4Ghz overclock (or whatever) is how much of a difference in speed you will actually feel when using your PC when compared to say, 3.6Ghz - In all honesty, it isn't a massive amount for day to day tasks, but it may require extra voltage to get there, so you need to ask yourself if the extra heat and power usage is worth the small increase in speed.

There's more to this, but as the question gets asked almost daily, I will sticky this in the hope it will help.

[Kelainefes]

Another thing to consider is that overclocking is basically pointless in games, except for loading times.
The FPS will stay almost the same whether you are using a 2.4 GHz dual core or a 4 GHz quad (ie a 5 fps difference at best).
Once you get to 3.2 GHz there is no point to go faster.

P.s.:The clock speeds indicated are valid only for Intel Core 2 CPUs.

[Clunk]

OK, fair point

[MustRotate]

Yeah but then there is a group of questions: why the need for DFI,gtlrefs,Asus boards with 1kg copper heatsinks and most of all big chunky heatsinks. With stock VTT you can manage with the stock cooling.
My example: i did not buy a 300euro cpu and a 300euro board to use them at stock. For that purpose i could have bought an Asrock or a Gigabyte.
As for the comparison GHz vs FPS i can tell you this, i have a friend who was playing GRID and the switch from a Q6600 to Q9450 was significant, in the way that he really can see a difference. And this with the new quad being clocked lower than the old one(3.6 vs 3.35).

[Clunk]

Originally Posted by MustRotate

Yeah but then there is a group of questions: why the need for DFI,gtlrefs,Asus boards with 1kg copper heatsinks and most of all big chunky heatsinks. With stock VTT you can manage with the stock cooling.
My example: i did not buy a 300euro cpu and a 300euro board to use them at stock. For that purpose i could have bought an Asrock or a Gigabyte.
As for the comparison GHz vs FPS i can tell you this, i have a friend who was playing GRID and the switch from a Q6600 to Q9450 was significant, in the way that he really can see a difference. And this with the new quad being clocked lower than the old one(3.6 vs 3.35).

Well, they are a different set of questions than is asked daily on the forums. The dual vs quad debate will rage for a while, but thats for another thread too - this is simply about people asking what a safe voltage is.

[Kelainefes]

I can tell you why your friend saw a difference: the new quad has more L2 cache, and games love that.
There are some reviews around wich compare FPS between equal systems just changing CPU or overclock frequency.
Here's one.

With stock VTT you can go high expecially if you have a dual, way past where the stock cooler will do.

Why the expensive motherboards: they will allow you to overclock more, there are not just games out there and 3D rendering/video compression apps in instance greatly benefit from higher CPU frequencies, scaling in almost linear fashion.

[MustRotate]

Yes you are right about the duals and stock vtt but the quads need a lot of vtt to unleash. I was just pointing out that it doesnt seem viable to put a lot of cash in expensive high-end motherboards and cpus and use them at stock.

[Kelainefes]

Nobody said that you should: Clunk pointed out the risk that anyone has to accept when overvolting to get a higher/more stable overclock, i said that it wasn't worth it pushing it to the limit for gaming.
Also remember that high end, expensive CPUs are not sold as better overclockers by the manufacturer, they just happen to be in the vast majority of circumstances.
Overclockers usually pay more just to get a high multiplier and good silicon, but nobody is guaranteeing you a higher overclock when you spend more.
We have heard of many E8400 clocking higher than E8500, it's just the luck of the draw.

[Lexinator]

Originally Posted by Kelainefes

Another thing to consider is that overclocking is basically pointless in games, except for loading times.
The FPS will stay almost the same whether you are using a 2.4 GHz dual core or a 4 GHz quad (ie a 5 fps difference at best).
Once you get to 3.2 GHz there is no point to go faster.

P.s.:The clock speeds indicated are valid only for Intel Core 2 CPUs.

I do not agree with this.

My Q6600 at stock gave me about 36-40 FPS at max settings with SupCom... Less with a lot of action on screen, and I mean A LOT.

Just upping the Q6600 to 3GHz (and tightening the ram timings) I went to well over the 60 mark. Plus it stayed there. I could have hundreds of explosions on screen and took no hit. (Ok, well I would take a slight hit but you get my point). And don't even get me started on AoC... At stock speeds that game gave me about 30 FPS, and that was in the newby area! At 3GHz I get some good results though.

I do agree that 3.2 is all you need, which is what I will be going for next.

Although honestly if you don't crank up any settings I think you may be right about not noticing a difference in FPS, since you will be playing at over 60 anyway, lol.

[!TIMMY!]

I found this very interesting, it tests different Quads in games to see how much fps you would get.