Wow, 129 pages, I have read half-way through them, quick question here.
I was about to get the ASUS Maximus II Formula II but I found the LT X38 T2R for only $170 here in Japan, half the price of the ASUS Maximus II Formula II.......... just wondering if this board is worth it over the ASUS Maximus II Formula II ? $170 sounds like a great price for this board, will be using it with a E8500 for gaming only.
dctokyo: you're sure it's the LT not DK at that price, yes? Both DFI LT and Asus MF2 are great boards. If you are a tweaking veteran and always know what you are doing, DFI will reward you more for your finesse and patience in the long run.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vws
Thanks vws, it is the LT X38 T2R, the problem is that I am new to tweaking :eek: but would love to learn
Might be, I don't know.Quote:
Originally Posted by vws
Use the SmartGuardian tool, its readout is very accurate, almost as good as DMM readout. You can see it's undervolting there..Quote:
Don't know why but the vNB setting on my board actually overvolts a bit - according to Everest that is. I haven't used a multimeter to measure it up myself. So when you guys say it's undervolting, do you mean it in respect to MM measured volts?
Also what is the best reference while tweaking the GTL, do you guys all look at this table? That's for UT P35 board and I wonder if anyone has an update for LT X38/X48...
In case anyone wants to know, a Sunbeam Core-Contact Freezer will fit on the X-38 LT.
http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/293/pict0420rrrmq9.jpg
Waiting for Ram, then will be up and good to go, and will post Temps with Q6600.
Might be also due to RAM settings. I had a few USB issues with wrong clock fine delays. But with a 45nm quad BIOS 1/11 has a poor RAM performance, 3/14 or the beta are way better.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcool
The beta BIOS is not that bad, but 333/800 divider is buggy. I have to admit that I did not see any real improvement when replacing my X3230 with a X3350. With the X3230 I could lower tRD etc.. But now running the new CPU every improvement is gone. I think that the 45nm quads put an extreme high load on the NB and that eats up everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by zsamz_
This is using the beta BIOS. 3/14 behaves very similar, just required a slightly different NB GTL for both of these settings:
450x8 266/667 tRD7
http://www.abload.de/thumb/fsb450_ddr2-1126_x33t5x.jpg
Settings:
Screen shows idle Vcore, it's 1.28V under load. It's stable but for 24/7 VTT and Vnb are too high.Code:CPU Feature
- Thermal Management Control: Enabled
- PPM(EIST) Mode: Disabled
- Limit CPUID MaxVal: Disabled
- CIE Function: Disabled
- Execute Disable Bit: Enabled
- Virtualization Technology: Enabled
- Core Multi-Processing: Enabled
Exit Setup Shutdown: Mode 2
Shutdown after AC Loss: Disabled
CLOCK VC0 divider: AUTO
CPU Clock Ratio Unlock: Enabled
CPU Clock Ratio: 8
- Target CPU Clock:
CPU Clock: 450
Boot Up Clock:
DRAM Speed: 266/667
- Target DRAM Speed:
PCIE Clock: 100mhz
PCIE Slot Config: 1X 1X
CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
PCIE Spread Spectrum: Disabled
SATA Spread Spectrum: Disabled
Voltage Settings
CPU VID Control: 1.250V
CPU VID Special Add: Auto
DRAM Voltage Control: 2.0V
SB Core/CPU PLL Voltage: 1.510V
NB Core Voltage: 1.530V
CPU VTT Voltage: 1.310V
Vcore Droop Control: Enabled
Clockgen Voltage Control: 3.45V
GTL+ Buffers Strength: Strong
Host Slew Rate: Weak
GTL REF Voltage Control: Enabled
x CPU GTL1/3 REF Volt: 93
x CPU GTL 0/2 REF Volt: 90
x North Bridge GTL REF Volt: 97
DRAM Timing
- Enhance Data transmitting: Normal
- Enhance Addressing: Normal
- T2 Dispatch: Enabled
Clock Setting Fine Delay
Ch1 Clock Crossing Setting: More Relaxed
- DIMM 1 Clock fine delay: Current
- DIMM 2 Clock fine delay: Current
- Ch 1 Command fine delay: Current
- Ch 1 Control fine delay: Current
Ch2 Clock Crossing Setting: More Relaxed
- DIMM 3 Clock fine delay: Current
- DIMM 4 Clock fine delay: Current
- Ch 2 Command fine delay: Current
- Ch 2 Control fine delay: Current
Ch1Ch2 CommonClock Setting: More Relaxed
Ch1 RDCAS GNT-Chip Delay: Auto
Ch1 WRCAS GNT-Chip Delay: Auto
Ch1 Command to CS Delay: Auto
Ch2 RDCAS GNT-Chip Delay: Auto
Ch2 WRCAS GNT-Chip Delay: Auto
Ch2 Command to CS Delay: Auto (where cpuz sees 1T or 2T SETTING)
CAS Latency Time (tCL):5
RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCD):5
RAS# Precharge (tRP):5
Precharge Delay (tRAS):15
All Precharge to Act: 6
REF to ACT Delay (tRFC): 54
Performance LVL (Read Delay) (tRD): 7
Read delay phase adjust: Enter
Ch1 Read delay phase (4~0)
- Channel 1 Phase 0 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 1 Phase 1 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 1 Phase 2 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 1 Phase 3 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 1 Phase 4 Pull-In: Auto
Ch2 Read delay phase (4~0)
- Channel 2 Phase 0 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 2 Phase 1 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 2 Phase 2 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 2 Phase 3 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 2 Phase 4 Pull-In: Auto
MCH ODT Latency: Auto
Write to PRE Delay (tWR): 14
Rank Write to Read (tWTR): 11
ACT to ACT Delay (tRRD): 3
Read to Write Delay (tRDWR): 8
Ranks Write to Write (tWRWR): 6
Ranks Read to Read (tRDRD): 6
Ranks Write to Read (tWRRD): 5
Read CAS# Precharge (tRTP): 3
ALL PRE to Refresh: 6
This is for 24/7:
440x8 266/667 tRD7
http://www.abload.de/thumb/fsb440_ddr2-1100_x33q5d.jpg
Settings:
Code:CPU Feature
- Thermal Management Control: Enabled
- PPM(EIST) Mode: Enabled
- Limit CPUID MaxVal: Disabled
- CIE Function: Auto
- Execute Disable Bit: Enabled
- Virtualization Technology: Enabled
- Core Multi-Processing: Enabled
Exit Setup Shutdown: Mode 2
Shutdown after AC Loss: Disabled
CLOCK VC0 divider: AUTO
CPU Clock Ratio Unlock: Enabled
CPU Clock Ratio: 8
- Target CPU Clock:
CPU Clock: 440
Boot Up Clock:
DRAM Speed: 266/667
- Target DRAM Speed:
PCIE Clock: 100mhz
PCIE Slot Config: 1X 1X
CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
PCIE Spread Spectrum: Disabled
SATA Spread Spectrum: Disabled
Voltage Settings
CPU VID Control: Auto (1.2325V)
CPU VID Special Add: Auto
DRAM Voltage Control: 2.0V
SB Core/CPU PLL Voltage: 1.510V
NB Core Voltage: 1.456V
CPU VTT Voltage: 1.210V
Vcore Droop Control: Enabled
Clockgen Voltage Control: 3.45V
GTL+ Buffers Strength: Strong
Host Slew Rate: Weak
GTL REF Voltage Control: Enabled
x CPU GTL1/3 REF Volt: 85
x CPU GTL 0/2 REF Volt: 83
x North Bridge GTL REF Volt: 87
DRAM Timing
- Enhance Data transmitting: Normal
- Enhance Addressing: Normal
- T2 Dispatch: Enabled
Clock Setting Fine Delay
Ch1 Clock Crossing Setting: More Relaxed
- DIMM 1 Clock fine delay: Current
- DIMM 2 Clock fine delay: Current
- Ch 1 Command fine delay: Current
- Ch 1 Control fine delay: Current
Ch2 Clock Crossing Setting: More Relaxed
- DIMM 3 Clock fine delay: Current
- DIMM 4 Clock fine delay: Current
- Ch 2 Command fine delay: Current
- Ch 2 Control fine delay: Current
Ch1Ch2 CommonClock Setting: More Relaxed
Ch1 RDCAS GNT-Chip Delay: Auto
Ch1 WRCAS GNT-Chip Delay: Auto
Ch1 Command to CS Delay: Auto
Ch2 RDCAS GNT-Chip Delay: Auto
Ch2 WRCAS GNT-Chip Delay: Auto
Ch2 Command to CS Delay: Auto (where cpuz sees 1T or 2T SETTING)
CAS Latency Time (tCL):5
RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCD):5
RAS# Precharge (tRP):5
Precharge Delay (tRAS):15
All Precharge to Act: 6
REF to ACT Delay (tRFC): 54
Performance LVL (Read Delay) (tRD): 7
Read delay phase adjust: Enter
Ch1 Read delay phase (4~0)
- Channel 1 Phase 0 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 1 Phase 1 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 1 Phase 2 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 1 Phase 3 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 1 Phase 4 Pull-In: Auto
Ch2 Read delay phase (4~0)
- Channel 2 Phase 0 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 2 Phase 1 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 2 Phase 2 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 2 Phase 3 Pull-In: Auto
- Channel 2 Phase 4 Pull-In: Auto
MCH ODT Latency: Auto
Write to PRE Delay (tWR): 14
Rank Write to Read (tWTR): 11
ACT to ACT Delay (tRRD): 3
Read to Write Delay (tRDWR): 8
Ranks Write to Write (tWRWR): 6
Ranks Read to Read (tRDRD): 6
Ranks Write to Read (tWRRD): 5
Read CAS# Precharge (tRTP): 3
ALL PRE to Refresh: 6
I have always wondered how you guys find the best fine delays. BTW I think someone mentioned the 01/09 beta has the best fine delay settings (when coupled with the 01/11 BIOS). I've just tried the 01/11 alone without importing 01/09 fine delays, but it's got no better FSB than the 06/03 beta (with which I can reach 470 FSB for my Q6600 in memtest).Quote:
Originally Posted by merlin76
Is that why Intel sees the value of binning off the X48 chips (assuming X48 plays better with tRD, that is), or must DFI improve on their X38's BIOS. Also do you think if the P35 NB is able to push tRD lower with the 45nm quads?Quote:
The beta BIOS is not that bad, but 333/800 divider is buggy. I have to admit that I did not see any real improvement when replacing my X3230 with a X3350. With the X3230 I could lower tRD etc.. But now running the new CPU every improvement is gone. I think that the 45nm quads put an extreme high load on the NB and that eats up everything.
1.53V Bios MCH too high for 24/7?
I don't think so.. running around 1,55 Bios here 24/7 since I got it. It's watercooled though...
1,5V (real) loaded isn't that much for an X38.
fsb tops off @ 550-555 on the board 1/11 is best bios so far betas are crapQuote:
Originally Posted by vws
333/800 is the best divider
and yes dfi gotta get off their asses and support the bios to be as good as the ut p35
the way it stands now the ut p35 is a faster board
You really still think anything's going to happen in the bios area zsamz?
I mean, I would love to believe that one day I will get my Q6600 above that meagre FSB 450 on this board. But I'll probably get a QX before they release a new bios :D
IF they ever release one, that is.
its not the board holding you back i wish i had a quad to play withQuote:
Originally Posted by jcool
and yes we need a good bios this is getting ridiculous
they set the standard with the ut p35 n .... i'm close to switch to my dfi ut p35
You're right, there are vendors like Gigabyte raising Vnb by 0.3V when FSB is over 400 and Vnb set to auto. My NB is watercooled, too. But for only 10Mhz more FSB +0.1V VTT and Vnb is not in relation to performance gain.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcool
FSB460 was the max I could achieve with my X3230. As it was the same on Gigabyte X38-DQ6, the cause should be FSB wall. Did you try to tweak GTL values? Hopefully it's not the NB topping out.
With the beta BIOS I finally got 450x8 266/667 tRD6 stable again, requires 1.566V Vnb and NB GTL of 105, rest of settings is unchanged. I'll try more FSB later.
http://www.abload.de/thumb/450x8_x3350_trd64ns.jpg
Yeah I tried every GTL set between 80 and 160.. no luck whatsoever. It seems like it just hits a wall, but it's not the CPU topping out (ran FSB 480 fine on an IX38 with 1,39V VTT and almost reference GTLs, no less).
I've tried almost max MCH, 1,55V VTT, nothing. No boot above 460 and even that isn't gonna hold for anything but SuperPi. :(
It must be the bios being somehow flawed.. cause man, I really tried everything. Every strap/mem divider, nearly every GTL and voltage setting, different CPU mults.. nothing, argh.
on a quad 1 wrong setting can result instability after 450fsb on my e6850 i can boot 500fsb on auto
keep on tryin gl
Guys,
I've spent weeks on this, I'm done trying. I'm an OC guy since Pentium 1, and never stopped. Owned various DFIs, socket A, 939, 680 LT and now the X38. I certainly know my way around this stuff and I tell you.. it's not possible as things stand right now. Maybe with a new bios.. but not on 1/11 and certainly not on 3/14. :rolleyes:
Go on call me a noob if you like, I'm telling you the bios is flawed as it is, making it impossible to reach good FSB with a quad right now. Period.
Hell, I might even buy a P35 DFI to prove my point :p: :shakes:
Now you are making me so depressed about my decision last month... :(Quote:
Originally Posted by jcool
Well, have a great 4th evening y'all.
well i bought the ut p35 to see if it was better than the x38 lolQuote:
Originally Posted by jcool
and it is:p:
but you not tryin hard enough mind you its much easier to overclock on the p35
bios is not completly flawed dfi gotta get off their lazy asses n improve bios
only thing i see that needs improvement is ram effeciency /highfsb 555+/better squew settings
i'm tempted to buy a quad n go 500fsb:D on this board
i think i told you to get the ut p35:rofl::rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by vws
How about the LT X48 board? Are those X48 guys doing any better than we X38 owners? They'd better not or something is seriously/deliberately wrong...Quote:
Originally Posted by zsamz_
Nah, I am like jcool who has been thru 3 gens of DFI boards since the NFII Ultra B era. We are the die hard type that we must "tweak to believe" - and yeah, we now got the bummer, too. Don't know what happens inside Oskar Wu's mind but how loud should we yell at him to wake him up? :mad: I recall back in s939 days Merlin even made a hacked BIOS that became the best OC BIOS ever for DFI eXpert. Where is this guy now???Quote:
Originally Posted by zsamz_
@ jcool
Did you try with only 2 sticks of RAM to reduce load on NB?
When it comes to GTL values most important is correct NB GTL. One value off may result in a completely unstable system. I had a lot of fun with it using my new CPU. ;)
x48 not any betterQuote:
Originally Posted by vws
to be honest i wasted money buyin this board shoulda bought the ut p35
i just hope dfi bios engineers get off their asses gettin ridiculous when asus has a better bios
big reason i went dfi is for bios n they lettin us down
No, because 2GB ram is of no use to me. I even use D9GMH sticks because they are the only ones the board likes, apparently. No GKX, no powerchips etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by merlin76
the board likes powerchips n loves d9hmh verry picky on d9gkxQuote:
Originally Posted by jcool
with d9gkx better off cas3-4
this is powerchips;) but i prefer d9gmh:D
i dont know which chips my reapers are but they seem to run very nice in this chipset.
http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/4...66strapuf4.png
standard timings @ 2.1v lol
http://img360.imageshack.us/img360/3...iderhe8.th.jpg
i cant grumble about a mobo that can do fsb500x8 proper stable lol.
if i want that better GHz o/c i'd buy a better cpu with a bigger multi :shrug:
obvously i'd hav wanted my mobo to be as good if not better then the p35's on the fsb, but i did buy my mobo before finding proof it was gonna be as fast.
assuming intels nextgan board = better was the wrong move :( p45's dont look to be all that great either going by the reviews about.
Hm nice. Mine wouldn't do over 1100 really with PowerChips...