Download
2007/07/11 Update
Printable View
Download
2007/07/11 Update
Thanks, but nothing improved by me ...
thanks , i will try it ASAP :D.
System feels a bit more responsive, ram latency dropped again, scores slightly better than 1202 at stock speeds (but who runs those :), just SuperPi seems to degrade ... overclocked scores are on par with 1202
changelog :
1301
----------------------
1. Update CPU uCode to support new processors
2. Enhance memory compatibility under full load (4 DIMM)
3. Revise Q-Fan control code
4. Fix system fail to resume from S3 mode via PS/2 keyboard
5. Update NV RAID ROM to 6.9802.
6. Add microcode not found & update fail message support
7. Finetune CPU fan speed too low warning range
8. Use new French translation
9. Modify General Help string.
10.Fixed floppy item value error.
11.Use new Simplified Chinese translation.
12.Use new Japanese translation.
13.Support post message in Japanese
14.Use new German translation.
15.Fixed incorrect CPU Vcore when set to above 1.60V
Currently i test 1401 - whooah ;) will show you dual core fsb tommorow ;)
Could you please post a changelog, and more important, a download-link? That would be very nice!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Dan
forget it this dude will share NOTHING he is an Asus bios Tester very Important Hero........
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
are you firewire on hardwaredeluxe forum Lotzi ? ( ya specs are similar )
on a note pmp did share us the changelogs before, bios itself is something different ofcourse as i tneeds to undergo testing by them....
im having truble with 6850 and my dang striker board.
ive tried 1004, 1102, 1202, 1301.
none of them have got me into a bios screen yet
1202 gave me a post screen but no bios...and a cmos error message.
any ideas as to G0 e6x50 support for striker extreme?
mine is an early rev 1.00G btw
very close to ditching this board....but as it was a pretty penny do not really want to...
any help/ideas would be appreciated by me :confused:
i have no problem with G0 ... on my Striker ...
what revision is your striker , and what bios did you use?
i may have to send my 6850 back.
im trying to determine whether my mobo is faulty or the chip
any info you could provide would help me :? :)
i have last revision of mobo, and bios 1301
There is only one revision of Striker Extreme board, and all batches are fully compatible with G0 stepping, starting from 1201 BIOS.Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
Be sure that you provided enough cooling to NB/SB. Very often it's high temperatures keeps ppl from getting higher FSB.
i think my striker was/is damaged....(particularly the nb chip)
ive taken the battery out..might try 1301 flashy sometime again...i got a p5k so no dramas. bothe the 4300 and the new 6850 i got work well on the new board...so i havent overvolted the 4300 to death....the nb just shat itself....i think i damaged the nb chip while mounting the nb cooler.
your replies are appreciated tho' ...
Sorry but polish amateurs know nothing ... Striker has few revisions ... teach more, then you will post bull ....Quote:
Originally Posted by pmp
i thought there was a 1.03 or 1.06?? cant remember.
I heard rumours of an 1.03G or something but never saw that on a piccie... but I think pmp is correct only one official rev (print on the board), but some differences in the heatpipes ... and countries of fabrication maybe
If you know better, please show us anything other than 1.00G - BTW> it's just a revision of PCB, not a revision of board :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by OBR
But... you know it better, don't you ?
The only versions that I have seen are;
1. Taiwan manufaturing number is 90-MIB140-G0EAY00T.
2. China manufacturing number is 90-MIB140-G0AAY00Z and has a different heat pipe setup.
Both have 1.00G designations printed on the motherboard.
Really interested in your results with the 1401 bios. Do you have the capability of testing a Quad Core processor as well?Quote:
Originally Posted by pmp
Victor wangs results are here somewhere with the new Quadcore GO at almost 500mhz with the latest bios on the Striker on air cooling !!! so the board is taking huge steps forward with the latest biosses...
Damn I got ripped of on Ebay , won me a QS6700 dirt cheap, payed the guy ( had several good user reports) now got an email by Ebay that they removed the seller as he seems to be doing some frauds ( maybe one of the reasons he didn't accept Paypall)They must be correct as I get no longer response on the mails... sad peeps around ... very sad...
I've only seen two Striker Extreme's, but the revisions seem to be the same 1.00G but one of them has an extra heatpipe closer to the RAM slots. Which actually gets in the way of some HSF so I'm not impressed.
Otherwise I personally have not seen other board revisions besides the mentions 1.00G.
I bought the Striker when it was first available in Canada, and it only has the lower heatpipe closest to the RAM slot. With my older OCZ Special Ops PC6400, I managed to get 1750 MHz FSB.
I haven't tried anything else since I bought better RAM and newer BIOS's, because I'm waiting for a Q6600 G0. I also have yet to test stability with 4x 1GB OCZ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmp
Did I miss something or haven't these results been published up to now? :confused:
Well 1302 bios improved quadcore overclocking, if they can up some more FSB on the new 1333FSB CPU's, that would be nice.
I read some other posts concerning the latter cpu's that newer biosses resolve new FSB holes... anyway the Striker board is maturing fast now... :clap:
Not yet.I found some troubles with latest 1401/1301, so for now i would advise that it should not be used, as at some conditions you will be unable to enter BIOS without 533/SPD only RAM sticks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Dan
Nothig really, it's still at QC stage.Quote:
Originally Posted by markost
also one thing I noticed pmp if you enable numlock in the bios to alter a FSB setting eg the scrolling arrows don't work anymore, numlock off and you can navigate again... but stability is great
Nope you didn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Dan
Lately i've been very busy, now i'm going for vacation so for today i can say only that changes are going in the right direction.
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=219367
http://strony.aster.pl/pmpcfg/PC/ASU..._FSB458x11.jpg
With dual core, it's able to do FSB525 also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmp
Impressive! It is good to know I will be able to keep my board for a wee bit longer.
PMP is Asus close to releasing the 1401 Bios?
afaik, at the end of upcoming week next build should be released for public purposes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmp
Thanks for replying and giving these informations.
Enjoy your vacations! :toast:
Just curious what are you using to cool your quad?
1303-BIOS-DOWNLOAD
2007/07/26 UPDATE
Thanks for the UP
Is this what pmp called BIOS 1401?
I want to see changelogs
I notice not much difference, again did all the tests in Everest 3dmark, aquamark and SuperPI and scores are slightly better or equal than 1301
Did you notice any change in the BIOS? Anything added or deleted?
Nope all seems the same also when leaving the subtimings , no changes there detected via memset, preliminary testing as I did before sees a small increase again, stock scores are around 1201 level stock and slightly better than 1301 overclocked... I will post some results here and on I4Memory mate...
Test setup :
E6600@2400 632a
Striker Extreme 1102/1202/1303 bios
2 gig Gskill C5 5-5-5-15 2T all other memsettings on auto
EVGA 8800GTX stock clocks 97.94 forceware
Stock 1102/1202/1303 ( all settings on auto ) just EIST disabled
Everest Home :
Read 7541mb/s --- 7347 --- 7504
Write 4778 ------- 4867 --- 4868
copy 5297 ------- 5287 --- 5294
latency 71.3 ----- 69.4 --- 68.9
SuperPI 4m run
01min 58.719s --- 01min 58.984s --- 01min 58.512
3dmark2001
44923 ---- 44666 ---- 44680
Aquamark3
137703 ---- 137026 ---- 137270
E6600@3600mhz 632a
Striker Extreme 1102/1202/1303 bios
2 gig Gskill DDR800 5-5-5-15 2T all other memsettings on auto
EVGA 8800GTX stock clocks 97.94 forceware
Stock 1102/1202 ( all settings on auto ) just EIST disabled
Everest Home :
Read 9845mb/s --- 9838 --- 9881
Write 7299 -----7300 --- 7303
copy 6573 ----- 6465 --- 6642
latency 55.5 --- 55.3 --- 55.2
SuperPI 4m run
01min 27.703s --- 01min 27.500 --- 1min 28.672
3dmark2001
59722 ------ 60304 ------ 60512
Aquamark3
181802 ---- 182400 ---- 182510
I have the 1303 running too.
Didn't notice any difference too. My striker is still unable to maintain a FSB over 430. Anybody else has the same problem? Any advice?
I went as far as raising the NB and SB to 1.7 but to no avail.
Would it be too much to ask the people who have successfully overclocked their FSB to give out the detailed voltages you had?
It would help a lot.
There have been a number of very good threads that offer excellent advice for that have a similar problem to you. One that worked for me was to lower the voltage of my ram when overclocking. Search function works just perfectly on XS. Good luck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Faiakes
I have already done a thorough search but I didn't locate a thread where people were detailing their voltages. Plus, those were on older BIOSes.
This appears to be the most relevant thread.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=132364
I found this thread to be very informative and helpful. As to it not being the latest bios, too bad! I worked out what I needed to from the information that Kanaak and others shared with us all. Overclocking is about working out what is best for your particular system, no two systems are the same even if both are made up from exactly the same components. Hell the testing and finding out what works for your system is the fun part of overclocking anyhow. But I do understand that it can be frustrating. The gist of what kanaak was suggesting is that this motherboard can require us to think outside the box. He lowered voltages to his ram and his overclock improved. I did the same to my ram and so did mine. Most of the time we just push more voltage when we get stuck and mostly that does help. Both the DFI P965 and the Striker Extreme are counter to that practice. I will boot up my Striker and see what is what with the new bios. What CPU and RAM are you using? I do not have a quad core laying around to test with the new bios.... So I hope dual core helps.
Voltages corresponding for the Vcore on my E6600 632A CPU (vid 1.315), Ram voltage required 2.2 volts (OCZ SLI 8500) , though the board slightly overvolts so lesser value set....
333 FSB
FSB - Memory Clock Mode: Unlinked
x FSB - Memory Raio: N/A
FSB (QDR), Mhz: 1333 (means 333FSB)
Actual FSB (QDR), Mhz: 1333
MEM (DDR), Mhz: 800 (means 400mhz speeds)
Actual MEM (DDR), Mhz: 800
Vcore Voltage:1.3825 (about 1.34 under load)
Memory Voltage:2.175
1.2v HT Voltage:1.35
NB Core Voltage:1.4
SB Core Voltage:1.55
CPU VTT Voltage:1.4
400 FSB
FSB - Memory Clock Mode: Unlinked
x FSB - Memory Raio: N/A
FSB (QDR), Mhz: 1600(means 400FSB)
Actual FSB (QDR), Mhz: 1600
MEM (DDR), Mhz: 800 (means 400mhz speeds)
Actual MEM (DDR), Mhz: 800
Vcore Voltage: 1.475 (1.42 under load)
Memory Voltage:2.175
1.2v HT Voltage:1.4
NB Core Voltage:1.45
SB Core Voltage:1.55
CPU VTT Voltage:1.45 (very important to get it stable)
450FSB ( 8 x 450 )
FSB - Memory Clock Mode: Unlinked
x FSB - Memory Raio: N/A
FSB (QDR), Mhz: 1800 (means 450FSB)
Actual FSB (QDR), Mhz: 1800
MEM (DDR), Mhz: 800 (means 400Mhz speeds)
Actual MEM (DDR), Mhz: 800
Vcore Voltage:1.4750 (1.42 under load)
Memory Voltage:2.175
1.2v HT Voltage:1.4
NB Core Voltage: 1.55
SB Core Voltage: 1.6
CPU VTT Voltage: 1.5
Also on a note more volts is not always better it's always a mixup from voltages that get's these 680's stable... mostly 1.2 VTT keep at around 1.4 in bios, NB max 1.45 for 400FSB ( this chipset needs extra cooling to be stable), CPU VTT is needed to stabilize the CPU at higher FSB , but too much can destabilize too...
Always change one setting then test... what cpu are you overclocking with and batch/week nr plz ? also drop the multiplier to eg 6 or 7 and then up the FSB gradually, if it doesn't boot , try a higher value eg 400 (1600) doesn't work try 403 (1612), this due to numerous FSB holes...
Thanks for the link, I had read it.
E6600 L629F stepping. I looked at Overclocking.net and people report up to 3.814 Ghz
Anyway I'll test yours now and if they don't work I'll return it.
UPDATE:
I tried your 450 FSB settings but it wouldn't even boot (nor Cold Boot). I don't use a case and the room is cool. The CPU has a Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme on it, so it does keep cool, and the multi was set at 6. No luck (again)
Thank you very much for your help Leeghoofd & 1Day but after 3 days of non-stop testing I give up.
I didn't pay that kind of money to have the same problems I would have with a board costing half as much.
I'm returning the Striker tomorrow and will look into the Evga one.
Faiakes I am really sorry to hear that. Have fun with the EVGA mobo.
Well the F stepping isn't that good mate, does it do 400FSB ? my F stepping cannot boot at 450 either it's max is 444FSB.. try to work ya way up, just jumping the gun too 450 is silly...surely if it wasn't stable at 360... and 3.81 doesn't even require 425FSB... but I need 1.6 volts for my 744G there, 632 A does that at 1.5 real volts ( so 1.5625 in bios)
F stepping is voltage hungry temps seem okay but weird to me in reference to the voltage given...
I really don't think it's ya board it's ya CPU that's to blame....
Try 400 first then work ya way up, and my settings might be altered slightly to get the same results, they are a lead not a fact....
Thanks for the advice Leeghoofd
I managed to do 430 FSB with 6 multi and 9x400 for a 3.6GHz result but it was very voltage hungry despite the good temps. I have already sold the E6600 on eBay (by the way there is a superb E6600 for sale there) and bought a new 1333FSB E6750 which is faster and cheaper! (from what I read it overclocks even higher than the E6600)
I'm returning the Striker on Monday so if the E6750 arrives tomorrow as it's supposed to I'll have 2 days to test the board again.
why would you return the board mate, the board will power your E6750 fine with 450FSB or are you getting a P35 based chipset mobo now ?
I hope you have a good batch of the 6750 because there are also alot of duds there, ....6850 are all good overclockers ( till now ) lower spec CPU's are a mixed bag (again)
No, I still want SLI but I certainly wont keep any board that limits my FSB to 430... I can do that with a much cheaper board and spent the rest of money on something else (like paying off my debt...:) )Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
Damn it! I wish I was aware of that sooner.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
I hope it's a decent overclocker, otherwise it'll end up in eBay too... :(
Well it ain't board that's limiting to 430FSB it's your old CPU !!! Striker can do 475 out of the box too , 500 needs some extra cooling and a CPU that can handle it....
I brought back my E6850 in the box and ordered a Q6600 GO, if it does 3.4-3.6 with decent temps I'm happy...
Beta Version： 1303 2007/07/26 update
OS： DOS / All OS
Description： Striker Extreme BIOS version 1303
1. Enhance CPU overclock capability of FSB1333 processors
2. Add new CPU uCode to support new processors
3. Enhance memory compatibility
File Size： 668.32 (KBytes)
Global
thanks for the changelog! now I see reasons to update!
I hate my E6600 needs 1.42500 to do 350mhz FSB :(
I know is not the board since its a bad LA628A
I just received my E6750 (L719B030), testing now with 1303 BIOS.
UPDATE 1:
I've already managed to achieve 450 FSB with memory Linked:Sync Mode
vCore: 1.5 (it did that on Auto too)
HT: 1.4 (from Auto)
NB: 1.4
SB: 1.55
VTT: 1.45
(all figures in BIOS)
I am testing for stability now and will report results later today.
UPDATE 2:
I have managed a stable 480 FSB and and boot into windows with a 500 FSB but I need to tweak it to make it stable.
The E6750 reached 3.6GHz with 8x450, 1.525 in BIOS (1.5 in Windows) Idle temp at 24 C. Will further tweak it.
Unfortunately neither 1301 nor 1303 fix the problem of memory performance dropping after 424 FSB. Seems that the striker is brick walled performance wise at that point. Everest read and latency benches drop significantly after that point. Also is it just my quirky board or does 1303 react adversely with Razer Copperhead Mice. I can't get passed the first BIOS screen with my mouse plugged in. Flash back to either 1102 or 1301 and no problems. 1102 is still the quickest BIOS at least when used with OCZ VX2 or Reaper dimms, E6700 @424 x 10. Dropping in an E6850 over the next couple of days so that may show if the 424 FSB performance brick wall is fixed with G0 chips. 9X multi may be what holds it back . Unfortunately you need phase to get an E6700 over 4.0 Ghz using 10x multi and then the board runs out of steam at 424 FSB. Phase on a Striker/E6850 would be a waste of time as the 9X multi is too low. Keeping memory at the same speed, 500 FSB is decidedly slower than 424 FSB (memory wise). What ASUS really need to do is write a BIOS that doesn't choke memory performance after 424. Will this ever happen ???? If it wasn't for SLi, I would have been out of this board ages ago.
Really? 424 FSB same as 500?
So the only benefit is the higher CPU clock?
Yeah mate. 500 is slower than 424. Did the same on another phase machine using a X6800 with the same results. He actually dropped back from 500 x 9 to 424 x 10 (-260 Mhz) and prefers it there. We all know that the memory interface is what limits speed so why would you build a reference board that slows down at the top end. Sure 3D and synthetic CPU benches will always be better with high FSB, but the idea if this whole exercise is to get the most physical speed possible. You can't get that when a board actually degrades performance after a certain point. I've built heaps of high end machines for clients and often the fastest performance wise (not bench wise) are the ones which have the memory interface tweaked to the eyeballs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Faiakes
A Porsche GT3 RS has nowhere near the HP of a Bentley Continental but gets around a race track a damn site quicker.
How did you measure that? What kind of software/tests? You got me intrigued now.
Has anyone had the same experience?
yep, that's why I find it so amusing that so many peeps are pushing their FSB and ram to extreme limits while it doesn't neccesarily give that better performance (due to looser strap, timings)... for me I'm running always in safe mode in comparison to other members here
I run my E6600's at 3.6Ghz for me 9 x 400, DDR 800 3-3-3-10 1T is faster than 8 x 450 , DDR 1066 5-5-5-15 2T
you can measure ram bandwith with memtest, everest home, Sisoft Sandra and co, SuperPI, 3dmarks etc....
I did some quick tests for you keeping ram at the same speed (DDR800 with 4-4-4-5), I get more gain running with 1T then running high ram clocks with 2T (never been over 1120mhz)
E6600@3600Mhz
9 x 400 , 8 x 450 ram DR800 4-4-4-5 2T, if I set ram at 1T at 450FSB I get stability issues 3rd 3600Mhz DDR800 4-4-4-5 1T
Everest read 10238 --- 10116 --- 10660
Everest Write 7306 --- 8214 --- 7305
Everest Copy 6783 --- 6711 --- 7296
Latency 52 --- 52.9 --- 48.7
Aquamark 185983 ---186063 --- 192737
SuperPI 1m 14sec 306 --- 14sec 313 --- 14sec 250
It's hard though to compare some numbers with other's as some peeps use an older or newer version of the software... but you can compare for yourself if a certain value gives you that extra ooomph....
I think the Asus board handles tighter timings then the EVGA and BFG reference ones, hence why we are blocked with lower FSB OC in general and the board is also harder to setup then the mentioned ones.... and I can confirm if you didn't need SLI don't buy a 680i it's a waste of money, P35 feels so much smoother and is so much easier to setup...
And there is a problem with USB copperhead mice as some boards fail to boot when plugged in... apparently older biosses don't have this issue... (reminds me of the old Abit AN8 SLI days lol)
Hey Faiakes. Leeghoofd sums it up pretty well in the post above. Use all the well known benching apps and they'll all tell you the same story about the Striker. In terms of speed, your wasting your time going higher than 424 FSB. If you don't have SLi, don't waste your time with the Striker. But as far as SLi boards go, it's about as good as you can get. I haven't tried the DFI 680i LT and from what bigtoe is doing with it http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=157Quote:
Originally Posted by Faiakes
it may be the quickest but not with quads.
No m8. It's not. Currently next major upgrade is still under qtc, just be patient ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by slim142
More details by beginning of next week, when i finish my vacation time.
Good stuff PMP. just when you think not much is happening, a carrot gets dangled to keep you keen. Are you hinting that the huge performance drop after 425 FSB will be fixed up ?????Quote:
Originally Posted by pmp
I see.
Well, I definitely want SLI which is I why I forked out for an 680i board.
I have currently reched a 8x475=3800 (3DMark06 11993) with my E6750 and I'll run Everest and Sandra to confirm the above mentioned memory performance limit.
By the way the DFI board seems to have a lot of issues. It is nowhere near the Striker (nice chipset cooling scheme though)
Well those settings are nice Faiakes but I wouldn't recommend running 475 FSB 24/7... I back off to 333FSB for day to day use and only when I need it (benching, showing off) I load overclock setting 2
Of course not. That is just for playing STALKER at max settings (damn game!)
Although load temp is 48 C, which isn't bad. If only I could learn how to spead that paste properly...
I am back to profile 1 with stock settings for cool, quiet and economical operation. Now I am interested in upgrading my memory to something as good as yours though. Care to provide a link and some info?
About your memory:Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
I have found the GSkill online but my 7200 can already do 4-4-4-12 up to 500MHz. Would there be any performance benefit from upgrading to the GSkill one?
Your PC(2)8500 is very impressive. How likely would it be that I could match that if I bought a pair of those too?
I'll do some tests with the current Gskill PC6400PK versions I test (4-4-4-12 and 4-4-3-5) to do some tests at stock ram settings... as these rams ahve almos tno headroom to overclock but great for day to day use.......
If your OCZ 7200 can reach OCZ 8500 plat timings mate 1000Mhz at 4-4-4-12 I would keep them but at how many volts is that ? 2.3 ? I would surely recommend added air cooling... Also noted that the expensive ram sometimes isn't really worth the hassle , I got the Gskills, as they were only 30 euro's more expensive than the OCZ 8500SLI I already owned... but performance difference on general applications is barely noticeable.... great for SuperPi and 3d benching though....
At officially approved 2.2v
Surely 3-3-3-9 1T must be a good performance leap over 4-4-4-12 2T ?
I am only interested in game perfromance.
Faiakes I seriously doubt that you will notice any real-world (game) improvements between the two different ram timings. By that I mean visual difference of any noticeable kind. However in benchmarking there will be a measurable difference, in so much that having a extra process running in the background (LAN connection for example) will demonstrate a measurable difference too.
Well you would be surprised how little difference fast ram makes, running 1T still has the biggest effect on 3dbenchies and co but little effect on gaming...
I don't own many games to test only play Quake 3/4 and GTR2 online... but as these are already older games no idea how to give ya decent output...
If I was you I would try to get all in sync meaning eg 450FSB and 900mhz ram... if you want to drop in CPU performance but gain a bit more in ram bandwith and co go to 400 region and run the ram in sync with the lowest timings you can and 1T to get the fastest ram performance (according synthetic benchies) I think you can go DDR 800 4-3-3-10 1T surely with the 7200 with 2.2 - 2.3 volts... My 2nd rig is off to a lan party with my nephew ( with the OCZ in it ) so I cannot test them till after the weekend...
OK thanks for the advice. I suspected as much. I had read a couple of articles from Xbit Labs and Tom's Hardware suggesting the same thing.
On a different note, I tried to recreate the RAM performance issue so I have been running some tests.
I can't recreate the issue (as far as I know):
1) RAM 424 (x8), Linked, Sync Mode, 4-4-4-12-13 2T, CPU = 3392
Everest Ult. 4 = 10653 7737 7034
Sandra 6 = Combined 22206
RMMA 3.72 = 3426
2) RAM 485 (x7), Linked, Sync Mode, 4-4-4-12-13 2T, CPU = 3395
Everest Ult. 4 = 11335 8833 7478
Sandra 6 = Combined 23140
RMMA 3.72 = 3831
That is the closest match I could find between CPU speeds.
It would seem there is a linear increase in RAM performance. Am I missing something?
Well you have to compare ram at the same speed so you need to force eg DDR800, now you are running ram at 860 or so and once close too 1000.. can't you run ram at the first setting 1T ?
:rofl: :rofl: get some decent skills + cooling :ROTF: :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
my stock is 500 FSB - with low volts & 1303
I'm waiting for the next bios to fix some "holes" (won't run between 1680 - 1720, etc.)
new found faith with this bios release though
Oooops, you are right. i was measuring purely RAM when I ought to have set the RAM at a given speed and only run the FSB.
Will get right to it.
OK, redid the test and these are the results I got:
1. FSB 424, 16:15, Unlinked, (397 RAM), CPU = 2967
- Everest = 9574 7723 6375
- Sandra = 19871
- RMMA = 3185
2. FSB 475, 6:5, Unlinked, (395 RAM), CPU = 2850
- Everest = 8247 7574 6224
- Sandra = 19300
- RMMA = 3173
So, yes. Despite the extra 51MHz of the FSB there is actually a decrease in performance, which is disturbing as it negates the reason for getting this board.
Unless you wish to run the memory at 1:1, in which case:
3. FSB 475, 1:1, Linked, Sync Mode, CPU = 3800
- Everest = 11929 8761 7406
- Sandra = 24784
- RMMA = 3797
UPDATE:
I compared same FSB but different memory speeds but got somewhat conflicting results:
1. FSB 424, 1:1, CPU = 2543
- Everest = 10046 6767 6731
- Sandra = 18477
- RMMA = 3384
2. FSB 424, RAM 475 (actual 471), 9:10, CPU = 2543
- Everest = 9930 6763 6939 ( Read Write Copy)
- Sandra = 19202
- RMMA = 3683
So, there seems to be a better result on Copy, the Sandra and RMMA but a decrease in Read and Write performance.
Help peeps then if you have THE skills in stead of posting comments which are pointless...and help noone...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambro
Not everybody is gonna watercool their PWM area let alone just the NB, so running 500FSB on a rig on air is suicide , if you want to prove me wrong put all on air, go ahead we will talk again in half a year.
If you thoroughly tested the board you will notice that performance degrades rapidly when surpassing certain FSB and secondly my 632A doesn't do 500FSB it's limited around 485FSB
Right again my friend:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
My point was to get some descent cooling if you want to run a high FSB - this IS xtremesystems. I'll let you know how this board is going in 6 months @ 500FSB, unfortunately the water stays ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
My sig contains enough info for people to follow what I've done - if they can't read between the lines then, yes, they might think it was a useless comment.
Faiakes has shown he had the skills to grab some of the highest benched scores with his ram setup as he detailed - as also my sig details
I think the previous post to yours by Faiakes shows there is a difference above 424FSB with sync'd ram speeds. Are you suggesting he, like myself, is not thoroughly testing this board.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
For the record - in my experience performance IS gained, although not by a great amount ... once again - this IS xtremesystems; so any little extra is what I am here for.
Abrasive my previous post may have been to you too; it may have given others the resolve to try for 500FSB to milk their systems before testing pmp's new bios. If you're content to sit and wait then thats up to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by markost
Don't argue with a fool, the spectators can't tell the difference ;)
Abrasive my previous post may have been to you too; it may have given others the resolve to try for 500FSB to milk their systems before testing pmp's new bios. If you're content to sit and wait then thats up to you.
Don't argue with a fool, the spectators can't tell the difference ;)[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately experience can be misinterpreted by some as narrow mindedness or not being seen to be willing to push the envelope. Xtreme Systems generally is about total system performance and not just extreme FSB. There are other threads which are dedicated solely to that topic. It is a known fact that complete system performance drops substantially on the Striker after 424 FSB. If a user is solely content with achieving the highest possible FSB speed at the expense of overall system performance then that is his or her prerogative.
Having built and tuned multiple machines utilizing Strikers with varied associated hardware using Air, Water and Phase cooling, none of those machines have benefited from FSB speeds over 424. All that is being said here is that if you want the best performance from this board, at this stage, with current BIOS revisions, it is more productive to tune it's memory performance rather than go for the big FSB numbers. I've had numerous Striker's all with late BIOS versions stable at 500 FSB but have always dropped back to lower than 425 and gained much improved system responsiveness.
I and a few others here, are simply stating what the limitations of this board are (currently) and trying to assist other inquiring Striker users into gaining the "highest level of performance" and not just "the highest FSB numbers".
The choice is of course, yours.
And you are correct, I will not argue with a fool. Some spectators can tell the difference
Well my point is and stays and it's not my point to start a flaming war here :
On air (let's say to run the board out of the box) it ain't guaranteed to keep those clocks, I've had numerous discussions about peeps :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing mobo/ram manufacturers that the prodcts they got were crap , they ran their rigs up to full potential with dangerous volts on air, finally the mobo, ram or both died and then they start complaining it's a crap mobo...
I'm indeed a safe overclocker , only pushing the rig when having fun or testing some new ram and co , I just want to spare some users the headaches & sleepless nites that not all mobo's or other hardware can't be pushed so hard as some members here...
I envy your rig as my board has never released it's full potential ( CPU limited here, as the cpu's do exactly the same on the P5K DLX ) but I don't even see, feel a difference at my games between 3.4 or 3.8 GHz as my TFT supports...max 1280 x 1024...
Extremesystems has changed more into a general forum where overclocks still lead the pack but more and more users tune in for general help then asking help for pushing the envelope, me being an very active rage3d and Abxzone forum member I'm still trying to aid those that need help , based on my own experiences ofcourse and that of other users...
Kinda interested in ya cooling setup Ambro , do you have a link where I can see more piccies plz as I might order too the full EK setup and do a second loop with smaller tubing for NB and PWM and keep the P5K Dlx on air... and go flat out on the Striker...
Cya lads , glad to see some users are at least happy wiht our superexpensive Strikers
Simple - are Faiakes results better @ a high FSB clock ( above your magic 424FSB figure)Quote:
Originally Posted by markost
YES :p:
improved system responsiveness @ lower FSB's - I don't believe; especially when the 3X bench programs of Faiakes (and mine I should add) say otherwise
Who are all these others to back you up about your 424FSB ceiling that you refer to??
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
what can I say - your point had to be made and it is indeed true and correct
my volts are pretty mild with these clocks for MY system; stock boards may have issues.
Safe overclocking? Yes but as I said before this is XS
(see Attached Image :ROTF: :ROTF: :ROTF: :rofl: :shocked: :up: )
(I should add this clause to all my future posts :D )
I am confident that a 500FSB is O.K - but only time will tell. 6 months we shall all know.
I run 1920X1200 - maybe it is the res but I do notice the difference when gaming on a good FSB clock. Lost Planets is especially responsive @ higher clocks which gives me hope when DX10 rules supreme.
My GTX runs 650gpu (I think normally 575) and 1070mem (I think normally 850) thanks to eddy's blocks.
I will post some picks soon in the liquid cooling area, thanks for the interest; other ppls machines inspired me initially - I only hope to do the same because this should be a fun hobby where users get something out of this forum :up:
If we can believe the guys at hardocp (the guys that knackered completely the Striker because they couldn't get a decent overclock out of it) even our 8800GTX sucks when running DirectX10 at it's full glory...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambro
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...50aHVzaWFzdA==
Well unfortunately there comes a time which someone dreads. To cough up and admit that one was rrrrrrrrong, well sort of. I just installed my first G0 chip into a Striker (E6850) and it behaves nothing like 1030 FSB chips regardless of which multi is used.
Initially I used an E6400, E6600, E6700, and an X6800 and they all exhibited the "crappy over 424 FSB phenomenon". With these chips, Everest Read would have been down 1000MB/s and latency up about 2.0ns. The exact opposite of the benches shown and with looser timings as well. Now it's time to take this chip off water and throw it on phase and see what happens. :mad:
Could you bring the mutli down to x8 and the memory to 4-4-4-12 so I can do a comparative test and confirm the results?
Aren't the final results affect by the CPU speed?
:cool: - time to start testing again, these G0 chips do behave differently (wish I had phase and a QX6850; that's a striker test waiting .....)Quote:
Originally Posted by markost
lost planets is pretty but I think crysis will truely show off high end equipment. - with vista64; hopefully I'll have my other gtx back in time for that so I can SLI it. In a years time a gtx will be cannon fodder, but them there are the breaks if you want to keep up with the bleeding edge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
Markost
424Fsb we know that is better than having it at 430, 450 or even 490. However, I thought the good FSB was 425 and not 424?
Hey SlimQuote:
Originally Posted by slim142
I recon that may change from board to board. On my board, 425 would drop performance, yet on a mates board using the exact same hardware it would do it at 426. On that note, with the E6850, I found a sweet spot of 1786 Mhz (4.01 Gig on water___putting on phase over the weekend) but on every reboot Everest latency would rise 2.5ns and memory read would fall 200 MB/s. I then dropped the FSB to 1785 Mhz and it stayed at the faster speeds every time. This is of course in unlinked mode, so it seems as if the speed holes on these Strikers may vary slightly from board to board (and also BIOS to BIOS)
but i would say that the variation isnt all too big and holes will always be there. we just got to test them out and see whats best :)
That's exactly correctQuote:
Originally Posted by NightRaven
Looking forward to the next bios...1401? While the 1303 is good it has room to grow when used with the Quads. Can't run my memory at tight with my Quad Core.Quote:
Originally Posted by pmp
ex. Using 1303 in both examples...
With Dual core: 3-3-3-9-1T @ 400MHz.
With Quad core: 4-4-4-12-2T @ 400MHz (1T is completely unstable)
The board runs stable up to 410FSB for me. Hopefully 1401 will allow the nice FSB clocks and tight timings. If so, we will have a winner on our hands. :up:
Thank you sharing your results with us here at XS. :)
1303 fixed some coldboot problems my system was having. Anyways, I use 450FSB daily and got 475FSB 8hrs orthos out of the box, no voltage ajustments of any kind.
Indeed, I done this fsb testing with the old bios, didn't retest it after flashing.
I got that also with my E6400, just the Vcore needed to be changed, with the E6600 it required more voltage adjustements to keep it stable ( especially CPU VTT) probably due to the larger CPU cache and the extra strain on the memory controller... you got a good one mate keep it running like this for along time !!! :up:
Yeah, exactly. I can make 3.8GHz almost stable @ 1.52v. But hey..that's not 24/7 voltages. I keep mine @ 1.46v and it run cool enough for winter. In summer i'll set it to 3.2GHz (1.3125v in bios and it's rock stable).Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
These straps just keep getting stranger all the time. just threw in some Reaper PC2 9200 and bandwidth is definitely not uniform. When running memtest with memory set at 1t @ 1015Mhz it shows memory bandwidth as 5615 MB/s. Up that to 1025 Mhz and bandwidth jumps to 5815 MB/s. Fair enough one would think. I then raised memory speed to 1035 Mhz, then 1045 Mhz and finally 1056 Mhz all at 1t and 4.4.4.4 with tight subs. Bandwidth stayed at 5815 Mhz on each occasion. Everest Benches confirmed that at all these settings, speed did not change and remained practically identical to the screenshot. Anyone got any theories here ?? 1301 BIOS.
Another question
Which is faster in real terms ??
Pic #1. 446 x 9 (unlinked) which has lower bandwidth & lower latency
Pic #2. 497 x 8 (linked & sync mode) which has higher bandwidth & higher latency
3D05 @ 446 x 9 = 21,316
3D05 @ 497 x 8 = 21,451
super PI - 1M @ 446 x 9 = 12.591
super PI - 1M @ 497 x 8 = 12.625
Super PI is slower at 497 FSB but 3D05 is higher even at slightly lower CPU speed and lower memory speed.
Lower FSB and higher memory speed (Unlinked) gives faster Super PI times, better memory latency, lower memory bandwidth
Higher FSB and lower memory speed (linked & sync mode) gives better 3D05 scores higher latency and higher memory bandwidth.
Which is faster?? In Windows, lower FSB and higher memory speed feels faster. using benchmarks alone.....who knows !
My call is that memory latency is the largest factor in speed but higher FSB certainly looks good if you like looking at numbers.
Worthwhile noting that 497 x 8 (unlinked) would not even post. I tested right up 515 FSB (linked) and it just got slower on all benches.
It would have been interesting to be able to run unlinked at 497 x 8 to see what the results may have been.
Link to benches here
Pic #1. 446 x 9 (unlinked) which has lower bandwidth & lower latency is faster in windows
Certainly feels that way. Lower Super Pi scores and lower latency gives more speed as against higher bandwidth and higher latency which gives better bandwidth benches.
I agree with you 100%! Timings were much faster with the dual core.Quote:
Originally Posted by markost
Quad 4-4-4-12-1T
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...z_44412_1T.jpg
Dual 3-3-3-9-1T
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3.../cachemem3.png
Benchmarks are "so-so" but I think things can be improved with a new bios.
Hey Shonuff : Are you getting 4.0 Ghz on the quad with watercooling ?. If so, what are your temps.