i did try the 183 divider and it did the same thing.
this is 255mhz @ 10x or 280mhz @ 9x it pretty much all does the same thing.
Printable View
i did try the 183 divider and it did the same thing.
this is 255mhz @ 10x or 280mhz @ 9x it pretty much all does the same thing.
home on lunch and doing some more testing
200 183 or 166 the system wont allow me to run past 2.55ghz
wow,, wth happened to this bios...i think im gunna be best to go back to 1.36 rev 4
ElAguila -
mine is a Promise TX2 U133 controller card NON raid version.
so i dont see why its messing with the raid... i dont understand anything about this board its really starting to frustrate me
1.B3 is out i made a mod verison of it on my site if anyone wants to try it. It has some more memory options.
was there any word from MSI what they changed ?
Any chance of also listing the original bios so we can compare.
(the reason i say that is simply cuz i wonder if any of the changes your making are making the bios go goofy, it may run but i mean like the throttling or the fact that i cant go past 2.55ghz now..
The original beta bios can always be got from the German MSI website Lestat as can the Moded versions from Murdock.
The TCCD version could be not working well with your system if thats the case i also have revision 1 on my site which has no memory tweaks.
The 1.A official can also be got from the MSI main site if you wwant to try that version.
Some Everest MEM bench, no tweaks, 1.8 official default MEM settings.
have you tried 1.b yet SE to see if you got anything different or better or worse ?
Yes im using my mod version of 1.B3 Beta now.
It provides slightly more vcore than the 1.A bios. It is also slightly faster than the 1.A bios. There are also 3 new memory settings although i dont know what they do yet.
It runs at the same overclock as 1.A havnt tested higher yet.
i did notice my vcore was slightly under the rated setting i used in the bios. dont recall what it was but 1.65 was like 1.63 on the mobo with a meter i think.. no big deal really but i am just puzzled why i cant go past 2.55ghz on the cpu
Lestat had another report at my forum that setting a AGP latency of 64 sorted out the poor AGP performance.
64 ?
wow thats odd it used to be 67mhz
but i'll definately give it a try
yeah its too bad you cant actually set that in the bios.
i tried it and then overclocked to 2.6ghz and started 3dmark and bam system rebooted.
so.. im done with this bios and ill try the 1.B but i doubt it will work,, if it dont then im going back to the 1.36 rev 4 and never trying another bios.. :slapass:
Can you tell me what the extra memory settings are that are in the new bios? Also are they hidden or visible in your 1.B mod? I may give it a try and see how things go.
Latency, not bus speed. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lestat
All the memory options are visible.
The 3 new options are
- Software memory hole remapping
- Hardware Memory hole remapping
Now from my understanding these settings are to do with using large amounts of ram with your motherboard. By large i mean like 4gb. I think its supposed to allow you to use 3.5gb worth of the 4gb instead of 3.25 gb if you dont have these options enabled.
Now in my opinion these are probably two of the most pointless options ever to add to a overclockers motherboard at this stage in its development. From reading around though enabling them has helped a few people pass memtest when they couldn't before. It moves the PCI registers to make space for the extra ram you see.
The other option is
- Bottom of 32-bit
With a hex value of E0 and about 100 choices all in hex to choose from ......
Have no idea what this option does, have no idea if my motherboard will explode if i cahnge the value so ill leave it alone.
In my opinion they just added 3 options that no one needs. And ignored all the memory options we want like max async, read preamble, refresh rate, write recovery time, write to read, idle cycle limit etc etc. :nono:
ohhh latency
hhmm 64 is a little crazy for a latency
like really too low.... but hey if it works.. it works...
i cant take these new bios's fellas i tried 1.b and its the same :banana::banana::banana::banana:.... i cant go past 2.55ghz no matter what HTT Ram or Voltages even running 2.7v it wont let me
these new bios's are totally fvcked and i mean that,, i just cant believe MSI is doing this.
go back to the pre 1.9 bios thats all i can say im back to 1.36 Rev4 and done with the 1.x bios's...
1.B is better for high HTT than 1.A
300 x 10 with 166 divider boots.
320 x 9 with 150 divider also boots.
330 x 9 with 150 divider also now :woot:
Never booted as high HTT before with a bios :p:
Well Lestat i dont know what to say really the maximum difference between any bios for me has been about 50 mhz cpu and 5mhz ram frequency. They all perform in pretty much the same ball park. Im just interested in features now so i dont have to set things in windows anymore.
thats cool SE you should really be crankin out the performance with setting like that
i flashed to 1.36 rev for and instantly BAM 2.7ghz and running 3dmark...
so there you have it 1.x is poo
i can actually boot and run up to 370mhz HTT thats MAX stable is around 365mhz HTT oops sorry thats with 1.36 or 1.8 bios no other works like that
so i dont know wtf the deal is i knew i should have saved a bit of cash and just got a 3000 venice. ohh well.
anyone wanna trade me a 3200 venice for a 3000 venice lol
the way this chip acts and the way the Newcastle acted prior to this are almost the same
i just feel like if i put this chip and ram on a DFI Ultra-D it would seriously work 100% better. damn it someone trade me an Ultra-D i got stuff to trade including a neo2 lol
i just down loaded speedfan does anyone know what the default temp1 is reading it showing 41c or is it a false reading
the 1.b bios testing it now i can use the 166 div again b4 it would bsod in when now im at 317*9
same here msimax in 1.A 166 divider sucked but its fixed now :cool:
hey sideeffect im having probs with pcmark05 my scores are really low.i looked at my score sheet and i dont get scores for any hdd test is this a known bug our just my sys i have a wd80jb
I only tried PCMARK 2005 once and it went all the way to the end of the tests then wouldnt show a score...Quote:
Originally Posted by msimax
Pc was stable at the time so i think it is bugged. Im not using it anymore i use pifast and super pi to measure cpu/ram performance. Everest and Sisoft to measure ram performance. ATTO and HDTach to measure disk performance.
Hopefully PCmark 2005 will be patched soon.
Has anyone used an OCZ Booster with the K8N-Neo2 Plat.?
yes up to 3.9 volts