***Asus Rampage III Extreme Owners Thread***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spoolindsm127

I also had a question about i7s and the individual core temps. For me I see a 5-6 degree difference sometimes between the #0 and #3 core. Is this normal?

---

Normal.

No problems at all, copy large files and groups of files all the time . Also using an Adaptec PCI card with 4 sata ports, all with no problem. System has two dozen drives connected in all kinds of configurations, ie Sata, E-Sata, USB, IDE, Network.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fuzelogic

Has anyone else had an issue with this MB and large file copies to an external HD?

I have a WD 1TB external drive and try to copy my backup files to the external drive say 165GB at one time.

If I copy the 2 files separately, it will be ok, but when I try to copy at the same time, it will either bluescreen or hang at a random point during the copy.

I noticed that Win7 sometimes has trouble shutting down with the external drive. When using the computer during the day, it will sometimes forget that the external HD is connected and not show in "my computer".

I never had this issue with the Rampage II board.

---

I've got a Crucial C300 SATA III SSD connected to the Marvel SATA _6G_1 connectors on the motherboard however I do not see anything in the CMOS settings that is referencing the drive or indicating that it sees the drive. What I'm I suppose to see in the CMOS settings the indicates the the BIOS sees the drive that is connected to it?. Is there anything that is supposed to be indicated in the CMOS settings that indicates that the drive is configured properly. I am going to use the drive as the boot drive but as with a SATA hard drive I need to know that the BIOS configures the drive properly. Please respond to this post with the information as to how do I install and configure this drive.

Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tistou77

the 1005 is preferred at 0011?

:up:

---

Looks and "feels" same to me. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhia

Thanks, will try increasing Vcore and lowering VTT

A couple of questions,
IOH Voltage, what is the safe operating limits for this? 24/7

What is the consensus regarding these 4 options, that may be beneficial to overclocking?
CPU Differential Amplitude [Auto]
CPU Clock Skew [Auto]
IOH Clock Skew [Auto]
CPU PWM Frequency [Auto]

---

I wouldn't go over 1.25V IOH, as it's usually not needed for 24/7. I took it to 1.4V on air for finding max BCLK. I use 1.15V for 24/7 just to be safe when gaming, but it can run 205 BCLK @ default 1.1V

AFAIK, CPU Differential Amplitude and CPU PWM Frequency could give you that extra stability when on the edge.
CPU and IOH Clock Skew is used for high overclock under extreme cold.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coolbreeze

I've got a Crucial C300 SATA III SSD connected to the Marvel SATA _6G_1 connectors on the motherboard however I do not see anything in the CMOS settings that is referencing the drive or indicating that it sees the drive. What I'm I suppose to see in the CMOS settings the indicates the the BIOS sees the drive that is connected to it?. Is there anything that is supposed to be indicated in the CMOS settings that indicates that the drive is configured properly. I am going to use the drive as the boot drive but as with a SATA hard drive I need to know that the BIOS configures the drive properly. Please respond to this post with the information as to how do I install and configure this drive.

Thanks

---

Cool...I have the same SSD 256GB. I had issues getting the mobo to detect the SSD. I only left the SSD connected and optical drives and booted with BIOS defaults. SSD is connected to intel on-board and not the sata3 controller...better performance (dont have spare PCI-e for addin card). Also make sure that ur HDD priorities is in check for optical and HDDs (SSD should be top. For example my HDDs list 1. SSD 2. 1TB 3. 1TB...etc.

Quick question - Will running the PLL voltage lower than normal (around 1.4) cause any degradation of my i7 970?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darkip

Quick question - Will running the PLL voltage lower than normal (around 1.4) cause any degradation of my i7 970?

---

I can't think of a reason why lower voltage would cause degradation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sn0man

I can't think of a reason why lower voltage would cause degradation.

---

Intel spec says PLL should be 1.65V-1.89V. Just curious if I might be causing any damage running it lower

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darkip

Intel spec says PLL should be 1.65V-1.89V. Just curious if I might be causing any damage running it lower

---

For the boards that allowed it, on the i7 920/930 a lot of people were running lower voltages on the PLL and achieving better overclocks. As long as it's stable, you should be fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sn0man

For the boards that allowed it, on the i7 920/930 a lot of people were running lower voltages on the PLL and achieving better overclocks. As long as it's stable, you should be fine.

---

Yep. I keep mine around 1.45-1.5V.

It was at 1.5V for my 5.59GHz W3520 submission and the 5.4GHz Pi runs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coolbreeze

I've got a Crucial C300 SATA III SSD connected to the Marvel SATA _6G_1 connectors on the motherboard however I do not see anything in the CMOS settings that is referencing the drive or indicating that it sees the drive. What I'm I suppose to see in the CMOS settings the indicates the the BIOS sees the drive that is connected to it?. Is there anything that is supposed to be indicated in the CMOS settings that indicates that the drive is configured properly. I am going to use the drive as the boot drive but as with a SATA hard drive I need to know that the BIOS configures the drive properly. Please respond to this post with the information as to how do I install and configure this drive.

---

I dont have an ssd, but i have a 1tb sata_6g wd black edition.
connected it to the marvel controller.
in the bios where it configs onboard devices, change onboard sata6g controller to ahci mode.
U should be able to see it and the speed when marvell bios is posting or enter the marvel raid utility to verify that it sees it and using the right speed.
but even without setting it to ahci, it should still run at a reduced speed

you shouldnt have to set anything for sata drives to work.
good luck

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JenBell

Guys...vcore advice for 980x + R3E mobo. Now I have until now been working my way up the vcore ranges and currently have it set to 1.25v. I have set my limit at 1.35v after reading posts on the net - got 32nm 1.35v 24/7 is safe. How many people have got there vcore set to 1.4v for 24/7 use? The reason I ask this question is that the crazy OC setting to 4.0 or 4.2Ghz automatically sets the CPU to 1.4v - this would mean 1.4v is safe for long term use if the cooling is good. I am on 3.9Ghz at the moment and want to know what vcore I should limit myself at. To summarize, how many people are actually running there 980x 24/7 with 1.4v and how long have u been running it (months, weeks, etc). Really appreciate the responses;))

---

I run 4.3Ghz 24/7 1.4v cpu ever since release of bios 0704. 0011 now and still stable with 100x linx. Like 0011 stability better than 1005 on my rig

my 980x is 100% stable: 32x133 at 1.375v
id say its safe for 24/7 on the stock cooler
but i down clock/volt it when im not playing games to save elec

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by axlros75

Asus support reply this:
That thing requires a driver on the PC end to allow communication with the iPhone / iPAD. I am checking with my Asus contact on the release date of the PC driver. Will come back here when I hear back from Asus

well, they release utility without Pc driver to use it.... EPIC FAIL:eek:

---

:ROTF: Isn't that some :banana::banana::banana::banana:?

I'm concerned that I have damaged either my CPU, DRAM, or motherboard component.

I'm using a full watercooling loop; but had been pushing voltages a little. For some passes of LinX @ 4.3 - 4.4Ghz, I had my CPU vcore at 1.5 with an i7 930. I also ran a high overclock with close to 1.5 vcore 24/7 ... for a couple of weeks.

I'd also experimented with memory speeds / relative CPU overclock, and had set the XMP profile that loaded from my G-Skill Trident 3 x 2GB sticks. The XMP profile seemed to have inordinately high VTT/QPI - about 1.48v ... I should have known better.

Anyway - suffice to say that I may have been brash with my voltages, even though most of my temps seemed within limits and a fair way off TJ max.

Lately, I've had to tune back my overclock on my i7 930 to sub 4Ghz ... and I'm still getting strange instabilities. I can still LinX pass @ 4Ghz, but I'm getting system freeze in my gaming applications at that overclock. I've eliminated my GPU's and PSU from any potential problem ... and right now I'm testing the system running just two of my three RAM sticks. LinX is now stable happily at 4.2 Ghz again, but with 4GB or RAM (dual channel).

I'm really only a newbie; but my thoughts are that I have degraded my memory controller on the i7 930. I can't hold clocks as high, and overclocks that were stable are now impossible to hold. Is my assumption consistent with what I'm experiencing?

I did for a time run my DRAM voltage at 1.72v; but I think this is more acceptable than running my QPI at about 1.48v ... and CPU at close to 1.5.

It's not the end of the world, if I've degraded the i7 930 to the point of uselessness, it's not a big deal to replace it since it's a relatively cheap CPU. Same with the DRAM; if that's the problem. The REAL frustration is that I'm not sure where the problem lies ... perhaps I have caused some fault in the actual RIIIE motherboard? This last possibility is the one I fear the the most, it's an expensive component, and I've set it all up with the water loop - I don't want to have to do a full system build again with a new motherboard, at least not right now.

Just to reiterate, I'm getting system freezes (not BSOD) when trying to game using overclocks that were once stable. The RIIIE has proven a great overclocking board, but I may have overvolted a bit too much, stupidly. Do any of you more experienced users think that my assumption of CPU degradation, in particular the memory controller (which I think is on the CPU) is correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toritechie

I'm concerned that I have damaged either my CPU, DRAM, or motherboard component.

I'm using a full watercooling loop; but had been pushing voltages a little. For some passes of LinX @ 4.3 - 4.4Ghz, I had my CPU vcore at 1.5 with an i7 930. I also ran a high overclock with close to 1.5 vcore 24/7 ... for a couple of weeks.

I'd also experimented with memory speeds / relative CPU overclock, and had set the XMP profile that loaded from my G-Skill Trident 3 x 2GB sticks. The XMP profile seemed to have inordinately high VTT/QPI - about 1.48v ... I should have known better.

Anyway - suffice to say that I may have been brash with my voltages, even though most of my temps seemed within limits and a fair way off TJ max.

Lately, I've had to tune back my overclock on my i7 930 to sub 4Ghz ... and I'm still getting strange instabilities. I can still LinX pass @ 4Ghz, but I'm getting system freeze in my gaming applications at that overclock. I've eliminated my GPU's and PSU from any potential problem ... and right now I'm testing the system running just two of my three RAM sticks. LinX is now stable happily at 4.2 Ghz again, but with 4GB or RAM (dual channel).

I'm really only a newbie; but my thoughts are that I have degraded my memory controller on the i7 930. I can't hold clocks as high, and overclocks that were stable are now impossible to hold. Is my assumption consistent with what I'm experiencing?

I did for a time run my DRAM voltage at 1.72v; but I think this is more acceptable than running my QPI at about 1.48v ... and CPU at close to 1.5.

It's not the end of the world, if I've degraded the i7 930 to the point of uselessness, it's not a big deal to replace it since it's a relatively cheap CPU. Same with the DRAM; if that's the problem. The REAL frustration is that I'm not sure where the problem lies ... perhaps I have caused some fault in the actual RIIIE motherboard? This last possibility is the one I fear the the most, it's an expensive component, and I've set it all up with the water loop - I don't want to have to do a full system build again with a new motherboard, at least not right now.

Just to reiterate, I'm getting system freezes (not BSOD) when trying to game using overclocks that were once stable. The RIIIE has proven a great overclocking board, but I may have overvolted a bit too much, stupidly. Do any of you more experienced users think that my assumption of CPU degradation, in particular the memory controller (which I think is on the CPU) is correct?

---

I would say it is the CPU. It is pretty hard to damage a mobo without doing it physically or running it overheated for long periods of time.

I am guessing you dont have another proc to test with? Easy way would be to find another one to test with and start to narrow down the culprit. Test with a new proc first, then if still the prob, test memory. If no go then it gets more interesting. You would then have to look into mobo, psu and so on down the line.

I havent scrapped a i7 proc yet but I did really screw a Q6600 and it exhibited extremely strange behavior close to what you describe. Zsamz has it in a family members rig running sub 2Ghz to run stable, and it was all done with a high clock, multi hours Prime run.

I hope you get it sorted :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darkip

Quick question - Will running the PLL voltage lower than normal (around 1.4) cause any degradation of my i7 970?

---

I don't know, I run mine @ 1.2V :D Ask me in a couple of months. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sn0man

For the boards that allowed it, on the i7 920/930 a lot of people were running lower voltages on the PLL and achieving better overclocks. As long as it's stable, you should be fine.

---

I actually had different experience and only know that bassplayer had found it to be more stable with Bloomfield.
But if it works... :up:

@Toritechie:
I could not agree more with turtletrax, but there is one thing you can do first, just to be sure, and doesn't require additional HW. Take that 3rd memory stick you pulled out and swap with 2nd one that is still on MB. That way you will be sure there is no problem with one of RAM sticks and that third channel on CPU's IMC is dammaged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by turtletrax

I would say it is the CPU. It is pretty hard to damage a mobo without doing it physically or running it overheated for long periods of time.

I am guessing you dont have another proc to test with? Easy way would be to find another one to test with and start to narrow down the culprit. Test with a new proc first, then if still the prob, test memory. If no go then it gets more interesting. You would then have to look into mobo, psu and so on down the line.

I havent scrapped a i7 proc yet but I did really screw a Q6600 and it exhibited extremely strange behavior close to what you describe. Zsamz has it in a family members rig running sub 2Ghz to run stable, and it was all done with a high clock, multi hours Prime run.

I hope you get it sorted :)

---

I've just finished a long gaming session with no freezes; using my old overclock of 4.2Ghz; but just using dual channel 4GB RAM. System was rock solid, I also did a LinX pass on it without a hitch. Could I be lucky enough that the RAM stick I pulled out was a bad one? I did a windows memcheck (from the F8 menu as you boot), and it said my memory was fine ....

Perhaps there is a reduced stress on my possibly damaged i7 930, I would imagine it'd be easier for the memory controller to manage 2 channels rather than 3 ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toritechie

I've just finished a long gaming session with no freezes; using my old overclock of 4.2Ghz; but just using dual channel 4GB RAM. System was rock solid, I also did a LinX pass on it without a hitch. Could I be lucky enough that the RAM stick I pulled out was a bad one? I did a windows memcheck (from the F8 menu as you boot), and it said my memory was fine ....

Perhaps there is a reduced stress on my possibly damaged i7 930, I would imagine it'd be easier for the memory controller to manage 2 channels rather than 3 ...

---

hmm "a linx pass"? Define stability?
For me, i run IBT first for 5 runs max setting. Its fast to identify whether system is more or less stable. Then reboot and run linx 75/100x for 4/6/8 hours overnight while i zzzz. 8)
If you suspect memory, run memtest overnight?
Had used Trident b4 this set, don;t remember it need 1.72 unless you are squeezing it to like 7-7-7-21-1T kind of timing.

hows 0011 for bloomfield? :) looking to play 920 d0 on ln2 for a couple days

Peoples...my CPU PLL Voltage setting is high. This is set to 1.8v at the moment, from previous responses it should be lower. Can someone give me what the default should be (1.1v or 1.25v?) and what should be my max with a 980x please? Thank u very much:-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JenBell

Peoples...my CPU PLL Voltage setting is high. This is set to 1.8v at the moment, from previous responses it should be lower. Can someone give me what the default should be (1.1v or 1.25v?) and what should be my max with a 980x please? Thank u very much:-)

---

The default is 1.8

Allot of people including myself are running it lower without issue. Try some numbers and find a value that is stable, but you probably want to stay above 1.2

Is it just me or is Turbo mode unstable for a 930 @ 4.2? I now have it stable at 4.2 200x21 (1.325v) 2000 RAM 7-9-7-24 but would like to push for 4.5. After experimenting for HOURS I discovered the following:

1. Anything over 4.2 (x21) needs ALL C-Stepping options OFF to even boot which adds an extra 3 degrees onto the max temp
2. Anything over 4.4 needs a LOT more juice. Even 1.41v couldn't bench without BSOD'ing..
3. Anything over 4.4 runs a LOT hotter. I'm talking 90+ under 100% load compared to 76 @ 4.2Ghz. Is 90+ dangerous?
4. It HATES 22x. 21x it is.
5. Turbo mode decreases RAM latency from 40.8 to 40.0 with CL7 timings in Everest
6. Holy :banana::banana::banana::banana: overclocking can consume your life... :-/

So I bumped up to 4.3 (205x21) and 2050 RAM with slightly higher RAM timings and a small compromise in temp. Seems stable but haven't run intensive tests yet. Superpi 1M is 9.5sec if I remember correctly. Quick bios rundown for current 24/7 setup:

CPU Freq: 4.2
DRAM: 2005
Bclock: 200
PCIE: 100 (+?) 8800GT OC
Multi: 21
Cpu vcore: 1.325
QPI: 1.5ish AUTO (1.4 or lower won't boot)
PLL: 1.810 (although it runs stable @ 1.65 I heard 1.8+ for Bloomfield, right?)
DRAM: 1.65 (Recommended by Kingston for 2000Mhz)


Sorry about the lack of detail. It's 1:22am and I should be sleeping. Should I persist with a 22x or 23x multi, or stick with the 21x and push the bclock? I'm still not too sure of the impact QPI and PLL voltages make to stability. If anyone could shed any light on this it would be much appreciated! :)


Thank you and goodnight
x

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toritechie

I've just finished a long gaming session with no freezes; using my old overclock of 4.2Ghz; but just using dual channel 4GB RAM. System was rock solid, I also did a LinX pass on it without a hitch. Could I be lucky enough that the RAM stick I pulled out was a bad one? I did a windows memcheck (from the F8 menu as you boot), and it said my memory was fine ....

Perhaps there is a reduced stress on my possibly damaged i7 930, I would imagine it'd be easier for the memory controller to manage 2 channels rather than 3 ...

---

run memory 1600-1800mhz @ 6-8-6-4-60 needs less vtt ;)+ less stress +its just as fast:yepp:
push the cpu till it caves in lol intel will give you a new one:D
or you can give her to a freind n get a good 920 or a 950
my mom still running the q6600 that turtletrax tortured :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff Flowerday

The default is 1.8

Allot of people including myself are running it lower without issue. Try some numbers and find a value that is stable, but you probably want to stay above 1.2

---

So am I right in understanding:
1. Default in BIOS is correct at 1.8v
2. People have run this as low as 1.2 (dom being one of the people who do...er...hello Dom^_^)

Can someone tell me the advantage of using less voltage in this case? Lack of voltage can also kill hardware and kind of weary of messing the hardware due to my lack of knowledge:confused: