I've had issues with Q6600 and Q6700's on my P5KPL's.

It would drop to low multipliers long before the CPU was even warm enough to spin up the CPU fan. So the fan would be running at essentially idle speeds still but the CPU would drop to 1600 or 800 MHz.

It'd probably be the better chip from a general usage standpoint, but those motherboards seem to have a hard time with them.

LHN91 wrote:

I've had issues with Q6600 and Q6700's on my P5KPL's.

It would drop to low multipliers long before the CPU was even warm enough to spin up the CPU fan. So the fan would be running at essentially idle speeds still but the CPU would drop to 1600 or 800 MHz.

It'd probably be the better chip from a general usage standpoint, but those motherboards seem to have a hard time with them.

The E8600 seems (need to check with better apps) to go to 2006Mhz when idle in latest linux kernel and around 39 C°.
Which problems did you find with those cpus?

I'd go to run a stress-test at stock settings, and it would get to something like 50 C, waaaay below the thermal limits, and throttle hard. I managed it for a while with a decent cooler set to run full blast all the time but that's obviously not ideal. It also happened when gaming.

I also found it seemed to perform a fair bit worse that it should have given the specs of the machine at the time.

EDIT: This was with a couple of different Q6600/Q6700's, and with known good RAM, a couple of different GPUs and a couple different PSUs

The VRMs on that board have no cooling whatsoever. I bet it was throttling because the VRMs were getting too hot.

Doing some stress cpu test it looks like it goes up to 65°C degrees not seen more. One thing strange is that sometimes the speed it takes to go up to 50°C or down to 40° is quiet too fast, could be some temp reading problems?
By the way the freqs change from 2006 to 3344Mhz with the ondemand kernel governor. VRM on the mainboard are quiet cold.

What CPU cooler are you using?

Could be that it isn't sitting on there properly or that it is a bad application of thermal paste or that the IHS is not flat and you are getting hotspots.

What does the program CoreTemp show in regards to the temps of the different cores when under load?

cyclone3d wrote:

What CPU cooler are you using?

Could be that it isn't sitting on there properly or that it is a bad application of thermal paste or that the IHS is not flat and you are getting hotspots.

What does the program CoreTemp show in regards to the temps of the different cores when under load?

I'm using a stock big intel cooler, the model with the big heatsink and copper cpu contact (I think it's from a Pentium D mainboard). I've checked and the thermal paste was ok and covering all the cpu. It looks like the speedstep is working cause the freqs is always changing and the temperatures goes down to 39°C when idle that would be perfectly ok from my point of view considering this should be the fastest dual core model. But it looks quiet not realistic the temps I couldn't say if lower or higher cause heatsink seems just warm even when the cpu reach 60°C.
I think I'll try another cpu cooler to be sure.

Well, you are using a stock Intel "cooler".

Those things are absolute trash and are not worth what you could get if you sold them for scrap.

What you are seeing from that cooler is absolutely expected.

They were trash when Intel started using that design and they are still trash over a decade later.

cyclone3d wrote:

Well, you are using a stock Intel "cooler". […]
Show full quote

Well, you are using a stock Intel "cooler".

Those things are absolute trash and are not worth what you could get if you sold them for scrap.

What you are seeing from that cooler is absolutely expected.

They were trash when Intel started using that design and they are still trash over a decade later.

I didn't know this. I never liked these 775 cooler for the plastic clips that I never know if they are stable or not and I've seen they used the same design also on the 1155 newer sockets.. 😵

How Intel has gotten away with using that same design for so long I have no idea. They won't even cool the CPUs that they come with if you put them under any sort of load.

The only time I use them is to test boards and CPUs to see if they will POST.

The cooling performance is about on the level of sticking a piece of poo on the CPU.

I have no problems with the stock cooler on my C2D E8400.

386SX wrote:

-which would you think will feel faster in office usage (before looking for a Q9x00 version)?

E8600 hands down; most productivity applications don't use more than two threads and will benefit significantly from the E8600's revised architecture and faster clock.

Also,

386SX wrote:

... it's quiet impressive.

That's "quite", not "quiet". Your CPU cooler is probably quiet.

SW-SSG wrote:

E8600 hands down; most productivity applications don't use more than two threads and will benefit significantly from the E8600's […]
Show full quote

386SX wrote:

-which would you think will feel faster in office usage (before looking for a Q9x00 version)?

E8600 hands down; most productivity applications don't use more than two threads and will benefit significantly from the E8600's revised architecture and faster clock.

Also,

386SX wrote:

... it's quiet impressive.

That's "quite", not "quiet". Your CPU cooler is probably quiet.

Thank. Also for the grammar correction, not my first language. 😅