OC DNA won't let you use a profile from a different EFI, I tried when 1.8 wiped mine. 1.8 will save new profiles, though, when resetting.
OC DNA won't let you use a profile from a different EFI, I tried when 1.8 wiped mine. 1.8 will save new profiles, though, when resetting.
Quick question.
Does this board support the Xeon E3-1270? Link
I know it supports the 1220, but that's the only xeon on the list. :shrug:
Deciding between that, an i5 2400s (both to smiply push BCLK) or a cheap i5 2500K if I can find one.
For CPU / memory speed and timings, all looks about right. If you can tighten up the timings you will of course see times go down further.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
This is why I tell people to NEVER use a Windows based flash program. ALWAYS use pure DOS or the built-in flash utility in the UEFI itself. Now your best bet is going to be to contact Asrock support, explain whats happened and ask if its possible for them to send a new pre-flashed chip to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverfox
Whenever you update the UEFI any saved profiles you had will be wiped. The issue you are remembering is when a user simply reset the UEFI saved profiles would get wiped.Quote:
Originally Posted by banwell
AFAIK, you may be able to, but its certainly not really a good idea to use a profile from a older UEFI with a new UEFI. I don't know all the changes made with different UEFI versions a lot of it is for R&D eyes only. Suffice to say though saved profiles from a old UEFI + new UEFI = bad idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailindawg
Honestly, I don't know. If the CPU isn't in the list its probably not a good idea to try. If you already have the CPU though, its worth putting it in and seeing what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Synthetickiller
Just got this board!
I have a few questions before building my computer:
- The low mmio align option: Should I mess with that or just leave it as it is? I'm using Windows 7 64 bit and Ubuntu 11.04 64 bit. No overclocking.
- I got 8gb (2x4gb) RAM. It's DDR3 1600, 8-8-8-24 and 1.5V. For this board do I have to manually put the clock speed and timing or will it recognize it right away. If I do have to put it manually, how/where is it done? Oh and that 1.5V, do I have to enable some other option for that? Thanks!
- Also, should I use the drivers cd or just let Windows recognize it?
It's supposed to come with 6 standoff screws but I don't see them anywhere.
Isn't "low mmio align" for using more memory for 32Bit system, is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by jd299
If so, you are using 64Bit OS so you don't have to mess with it. (I'm not 100% sure about this...)
You have to go in to the BIOS and in OC tab in the middle, you'll see "DRAM setting"
or something like that.
You can manually put voltage (DRAM Voltage section is in the first page of the OC Tab I think...)
and numbers to make it match with your default RAM setting. (you may leave the 1t/2t(1n/2n) to auto and see what it says in CPU-Z. But if you know the RAM is suited for 1 or 2t, just put that in manually also.
Leave everything else other than main 4 numbers (ex: 8-8-8-24) to auto since you aren't OC the RAM.
Don't use any driver than came with the mobo.
Download the latest driver from AsRock website or the components website.
Stand offs usually come with the case.
Some case has them pre-built in.
I have some question about the fan control in AXTU.
Is it supposed to Auto control the fans? or just the manual fan speed changer?
I have CPU fan connected to both of the CPU fan sockets. (1with 4-pin PWM, other is just the 3-pin)
Even I have the 4-pin PWM fan connected to 4 pin CPU fan socket, all it does is going for 100% all the time even where it is at less than the "target temp".
Is it not working or am I using it wrong?
Also there are 2 cpu fan sockets. I'm assuming the information from the 4-pin PWM controls the 3-pin side along with it.
(for using dual fan HSF like 212+, noctua NH-D14.)
Let me know if anyone know how to make this work.
Or do I have to use SpeedFan or some other app to do this?
Cool. That's good to know :)Quote:
Originally Posted by radier
Thanks! What exactly is 1t/2t (1n/2n) and where can I find out which one my RAM uses before installing the sticks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
Any downside to manually putting the voltage or is it preferred?
Oh and also, the clock speed. Is that something I'd have to put manually?
Just use embedded XMP profile (in DRAM section in UEFi set Profile1) and manually adjust DRAM Voltage to value you have on sticker.
1. No need to change MMIO, it'll be just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by jd299
2. Just load the XMP profile.
3. Its worth downloading the latest drivers from the relevent sources
1. The CPU fan headers are controllable, the 4 pin header is there for the benefit of the intel stock coolers mainly but can be used with just 3 pin fans too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
2. AFAIK, the PWM fan header isn't controllable. Using Speedfan might work on it.
3. Just in case, don't connect any fans to the 4 pin auxillery header. Its meant for supplying additional power to the system and while connecting a fan to it isn't likely to do any harm theres no need to cause possible problems for yourself ;)
1. 1T/N and 2T/N are basically command rates. 1T/N is more agressive than 2T/N so will give better performance, your sticks will more than likely be 2N.Quote:
Originally Posted by jd299
2. As above, load XMP profile.
Extreme4 1.90.
Whatever... :)Quote:
1. Update LAN boot ROM.
2. Update RAID ROM.
I suggested those option ROM updates for maximum compatibility (in the case of the RAID ROM) with devices. Good to see R&D even took it one step further and updated the LAN ROM as well :yepp: :up:
Ket why don't you read other post?? Default value for Low MMIO Align is set to 64 and ASRock support suggest that if you are using 64bit OS you should set it to 1024. I have posted a link about that few post above....Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
By default with the UEFI I'm running its set to 1024 anyway, hence, no need to change it. Of course Asrock may of changed the default option with the newer UEFI which I haven't had time to test yet, but I don't know why they would change the default option to 64.
Also, while I'm not going to pay it any attention, watch your attitude. I've noticed you being very rude and at the very least off-tone with multiple people in this thread.
Just mind your own business...you do not have a monopoly on being right.
P.S. If I am curt with someone it's because I hate people that don't know how to use search engine or manual.
What's the XMP profile and how's it loaded?
Uncle google will tell you what the XMP Profile is.
http://i.min.us/jcHOoU.jpg
Sent from my GT540 using Tapatalk
What I say 99% of the time has come from discussions I have had with my Asrock contacts, that would indeed suggest the info is right. Nobody needs to get snippy with anybody its all about helping Asrock users. Everybody has been good at ignoring when you do get rude or very off-tone and I'm saying now I won't have it ruin the good atmosphere we have got going in this thread. I'm asking you nicely here and trying to avoid having mods involved, theres no need to be curt with anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by radier
The XMP Profile is what most memory modules have pre-programmed into their speed data. Basically the XMP profile is a small segment of data stored that you can select to automatically have load the optimal advertised speed and timings. To load a XMP profile just enter UEFI, go to OC Tweaker and scroll down to "DRAM configuration", enter, and from there you can select to load the XMP profile :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by jd299
Thanks Ket.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
So what you are saying is the 4-pin CPU fan header isn't PWM?
I'm little confused...
I thought if I want to control a 3-pin fan, the MB has to support voltage control to change the fan speed.
I'm not even sure there's any setting like that in P67 Extreme4, though...
How are you guys controlling the CPU fan?
All going 100% all the time?
How about you Ket?
P.S.
Ket, I've noticed in your sig... your i5 was at 4.8 the other day and 4.7 then now 4.6...but the voltage hasn't been changed.
Is that how you get the 2133 stable?
Can't make 2133 w higher clock or something?
Just wondering... since we have very similarly acting chip.
When I say 4 pin auxillery connection, I'm talking about the one highlighted in the screenshot ;) I tend to run the fans at 100% as I have high CFM low noise fans anyway on top of already modified cooling. Depending on humidity I can idle as low as 28c on my 2500k even with speedstep technologies turned off. I can run as high as 4.8GHz, but nomatter the tweaks my CPU just doesn't like to run past 4.5GHz with total stability.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
No no. I know the molex 4-pin header is for extra juice for SLI/Xfire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
But you stated as follow:
1. The CPU fan headers are controllable, the 4 pin header is there for the benefit of the intel stock coolers mainly but can be used with just 3 pin fans too.
2. AFAIK, the PWM fan header isn't controllable. Using Speedfan might work on it.
The bold part that I'm confused about.
Since there are 2xCPU Fan header in Extreme4, one with 4-pin, other with 3-pin.
I thought the 4-pin CPU fan header is PWM since it's 4-pin. no?
According to you it is different between the 4-pin CPU fan header and PWM header?
Maybe I'm taking this "PWM" wrong...
I'm confused...
Oh and btw, what do you do to make you think your system is stable?
I'm asking this because the term "stable" I've seen on lots of forum posts but everyone does it different way.
Of course it depends on what each person do and wants from their computer, though.
This is what I do for now.
For quick test, I run LinX w/AVX "ALL" setting (6000MB+ for me since I have 8GB) run that 3 times.
And/or run Prime95 custom setting similar to "In place large FFTs" with "Run ffts in-place" checked.
Also make the min fft size to "1024". Run it for 20 min or so.
If it passes those tests and happy with the OC settings I have, I run Prime95 "blend" test for 10+ hours.
For RAM OC, just run Prime95 Blend for as long as it takes.
For GPU, I run 3Dmark11/vantage, Heaven 2.5, and just play BFBC2 max setting on 32ppl server.
I'm using a 64 bit OS so I guess I won't touch the MMIO then :D (since it's apparently set to default to 1024 which is optimal for 64 bit systems right?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
Oh and I'm guessing the XMP profile will also load the voltage setting?
Is it really so hard to find out and check it on your own screen? It's everything there. REALLY.
Check your manual ;) There is a diagram a few pages in listing what is what. The 3 and 4 pin fan headers are listed as CPU fan headers, where the fan header near the 8 pin ATX connection is listed as the power fan connector (PWM). For stability I run BOINC, specifically, SETI to check for stability. I just load up a bunch of SETI tasks to make sure all 4 cores are 100% loaded and let it run while I do other general day to day stuff on the system. I use HCI memtest to check the stability of any memory OC and I sometimes use IBT w\ AVX using the maximum amount of memory my system has available.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
Check MMIO is indeed 1024, but even with it set at 64 its not going to do any harm. Correct voltage for your memory should be applied by default without having to load the XMP but this will depend on the speed data the manufacturer has pre-programmed to the memory modules, so setting the voltage manually might be required.Quote:
Originally Posted by jd299
Sorry ket but i agree with Radier... people in this thread either A dont bother to read past post before asking the question or FAIL hard at using google somthing they use everyday. I think thats all he ment by getting short with people who dont wanna help themselfs.
I know what he meant, but theres no need to be rude in the process.
Thanks again Ket. Yes I'm aware of the PWM header but I thought any 4-pin fan headers are for using PWM fans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
And controllable whether it says CPU or PWM since they are the same 4-pin connection.
Maybe I'm taking this all wrong... Sorry I'm at work right now but I'll look thru the manual again when I get home.
I'll try HCI Memtest. I haven't tried it yet.
Also BOINC and Folding@Home are pretty much the same thing?
I'm really a newb at this whole folding thing... I've only tried it like twice in my life for only an hour or so...
btw, my MMIO was set to 64 as default. I'm not sure it's been set to 64 from the beginning or changed when I updated BIOS to 1.80.
But I just changed it to 1024 yesterday.
I think you are getting a little turned around on the issue. I was just saying the PWM fan isn't controllable, at least not without something like speedfan ;) For anyone thats interested, I found out from one of my contacts that future Asrock boards will use a different PCH heatsink. A new design is planned :yepp:
O OKie... Now I understood what you meant. Sorry about that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
I guess they heard you kept saying the extreme4 PCH heat sink sucks. lol
lol nothing like that, I just mentioned what a odd design the "V8" heatsink is and how it basically does everything Thermodynamics says not to do :p: I suggested a good old fashioned low profile finned heatsink with a large base area. I don't know what new design Asrock are going to use though.
I hope we can buy the new heat sink only and be able to replace it.
Probably not gonna happen, though..
I don't think thats likely to happen, but its no big deal. With some good TIM, screws and washers, and some sandpaper you can improve the "V8" thermal efficiency. Theres just no getting around its finless with a small base area that inevitably just turns it into a hot lump of metal.
@Ket, how did you get the voltage down? 4.5GHz 1.28v from your sig.
That would be curtosy of the new UEFI released for the Z68, I put it down to the new CPU table. Sadly I have had to revert back to UEFI 1.4 though as while I can push the limits of the CPU further, even with more vcore at my usual OC it fails IBT :( Once I reverted back to UEFI 1.4 everything returned to normal. This by no means signals that UEFI 1.5 for the Z68 E4 is bad, just that because I have a early revision 2500k the new / updated CPU microcode in the latest UEFI plays silly buggers with my CPU. Perhaps its time to buy a new 2500k :D
Because I get asked it a lot, here are the specifics on how I test for stability;
CPU Testing: Intel Burn Test with the latest intel binaries to enable AVX with Win7 SP1. I set IBT to run for 20 passes while under "Stress Level" selecting "Custom" and setting all available RAM to be used.
CPU Testing phase 2: BOINC. Or more precisely, I run BOINC: SETI@Home project. I make sure all 4 cores are 100% loaded with BOINC tasks, then go about day to day activities or gaming on the system while BOINC tasks run in the background.
RAM Testing: HCI Memtest. Without paying for HCI the most you can set each instance of HCI to run is 1024MB, so I just open up 4 instances of HCI, set 3 of them to test 1024MB, and leave the 4th at "test all available RAM". Doing this loads the RAM to between 99%-96% (Windows compensates a bit moving stuff to the swap file, hence slight variability) and just let the test run for at least a few hours.
Any idea when this buggers gonna come out i cant freakin wait beat mode 16x 16x gen 3 slots say its gonna be the z68 extreme 7
http://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php...type=1&theater
Asrock have the "Fatality" version of the board on their website already. I would suspect the E7 is one of the boards I'll get to lay eyes on at the event I've been invited to in London :yepp:
Voltage down to 2.8@4500 on P67 Extreme 4, latest UEFI 1.9
ya i cant wait. I would have bought it if it was out. I really wanted a 16x 16x board from asrock didnt want the ud7 thats some fantastic news Have loads of fun in londo and keep us posted.
It'll be a great day for sure. Getting to meet one or two of my contacts in person for the first time, talk to various people from top tech sites, maybe play with some new up and coming hardware, a fun day out :D
Updated link on first page with new drivers.
Latest Marvell Drivers are ver:1.2.0.1002
I left that driver out because both the P67 and Z68 boards use the Marvell 9120 controller. When I decompiled the 1.2 Marvell driver I only saw references in the ini file to the 9123 controller and (I think) the 9173 controller, so I can't be certain there won't be unforseen problems. If somebody wants to try the Marvell 1.2.0.1002 driver though (Clicky) and verify the driver works properly with the 9120 controller then I'll switch the driver.
Thumb up for the asrock effort for releasing a new bios update for the users who are still on the P67 chipset motherboard ... not forgetting us when the Z68 had released over a month .
this is the photo of a extreme7 boardQuote:
Originally Posted by Nw0rb
http://i869.photobucket.com/albums/a...5830/Z68E7.jpg
do notice the Z68 chipset heatsink ..
http://forums.vr-zone.com/photopost/..._6556904_o.jpg
it is identical heatsink design ... thus it is a extreme7 board.
There's actually a newer Marvell driver: 1.2.0.1003 - http://station-drivers.com/page/marvell.htm
Been using it for the past few weeks without issue.
Don´t know when but it most be close, this is what I found over at Tweak TownQuote:
Originally Posted by Nw0rb
Attachment 117655
Attachment 117656
Source
Consider the driver updated with the next package then. Hopefully that driver supports more controllers than the 1002 version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poohead
Just wanted to say thank you to Ket and others for being so helpful. My board's all set now.
The MMIO is actually set to 64 by default, so I guess I'm gonna have to change that one manually to 1024 :D
I'm just doing what I do anyway ;) Added bonus I got to make some contacts and friends at Asrock and get sent some stuff sometimes to help all you guys out with issues :yepp:
A little update.
I got my Xeon E3 1270 in the mail about 30 minutes ago. The system boots fine in bios v1.6. :up:
Also, Bios v1.9 is out: http://www.asrock.com/mb/download.as...xtreme4&o=BIOS
I'm trying this now.
I heard Ivy Bridge is compatible with 1155 but the cougar point PCH chipset of Sandy Bridge won’t support the new 22nm Ivy Bridge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostleader
So which means we can't use 1155 SB board for IB.
Are those new Z68 board compatible with Ivy Bridge???
If not then why would they bother putting in PCI-E 3.0 slot? Since it won't run at 3.0 speed w/o IB.
Also are those have the PCI-E 3.0 controller?? If it is just PCI-E 2.0 controller with PCI-E 3.0 slot means it only run at 2.0 speed...
All I've read from Intel so far points to all 60-series chipsets supporting Ivy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
It's been a while since I have been active in the forum, but still have an un-answered question. Eversince I switched over to the sandybridge platform from my X58 setup, my decompression time (or extraction times), have slowed down quite a bit. If say, I were to extract a 4.7 img file using my X58 setup, it would take just under a minute to complete. With my Sandybridge, it takes just under 2 mins which is a huge difference. I am still using the same hdd's from the old system. I tried changing the MMIO settings to 1024 which was posted early that it helps with that, but it made no difference. One thing I did find, was that if I extract a file to a hdd other than the one that the rar files were on, it would do it in less than 1 minute. All my drivers are updated, is there something I am missing? Everything else seems to be quicker than the old set up, but for some reason, extracting files is slower. Anyone have a solution? TIA
I am wondering is the MMIO option needs enabling when the O/s is first installed.
Maybe its just your HDD starting to show its age, apart from that, nothing else comes to mind atm :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by mean6
This is a post I'll be putting in the Z68 thread as well. Basically, everybody is hellbent on keeping their SB chip as cool as possible for some reason so I conducted some of my own tests and done a lot of research. Here is what you can expect to get cooling-wise depending on how much cash you throw at cooling your CPU and whats really going on with these coolers.
CoolIT ECO ALC - £45 Amazon.co.uk
Antec Kuhler H2O 620 - £46 kikatek.co.uk
Corsair H50 - £52 box.co.uk
Corsair H60 - £49.55 ILGS.co.uk (thats right, a better model is cheaper than the H50... go figure)
Corsair H70 - £73.39 component warehouse.co.uk
Corsair CWCH80 - £70.18 ILGS.co.uk (yep.. again a better model is cheaper. Methinks this pricing strategy is deliberate)
Antec Kuhler H2O 920 - £80.54 ILGS.co.uk
So, cooling-wise whats really going on here? Firstly I'm going to stress the difference in cooling between the "worst" and "best" liquid CPU coolers is 8-10c. This seems like a lot at first glance.. but is it? Well, here is how that list breaks down;
ECO ALC > Antec H2O 620 > Corsair H50 - There is nothing seperating ANY of these coolers. The minors differences (3c at best) can easily be chalked up to the type of TIM and fan the manufacturer has chosen to use. Something easily overcome with some proper TIM like MX4 alone nevermind a better fan as well.
H60 > H70 - You guessed it, theres nothing seperating these coolers either. Again (surprise, surprise) about 3c at best. Which also (again) can be put down to TIM and the fan used.
Corsair H80 (CWCH80) > Antec H2O 920 - A double phat radiator and these suckers still can't get a significant gain over any of the earlier coolers. These coolers make up the 8-10c difference.
By now you are all probably wondering what I'm getting at, its this; Anybody who owns one of these coolers before plumping out perhaps £80 on a new and "better" liquid CPU cooler instead opt to buy 1 or 2 (whichever is your preference) new fans (the coolermaster sickleflow fans are excellent, 70CFM @ low dba) and some high performance TIM like MX4. Remount your existing cooler with these upgrades and then look up some reviews and compare your new temps to the liquid cooler you had in mind as a replacement. I'm betting your existing cooler is now performing within a few degrees of that cooler you were about to splash some cash on ;)
Some of you might think "Oh but wait! I can do the same thing to the more expensive cooler too." This is correct, but A: The more expensive cooler is likely going to already be using fan(s) equally as good as the new fan(s) you have just got meaning you won't really see any (if any) gains. Lastly, B: You would hope the more expensive cooler is also using better TIM which again means you probably wouldn't see much gain by replacing the TIM on the more expensive cooler.
Give this a go readers, I think you'll be surprised.
Noctua Nh-d14 sell the fans on ebay and go passive!
I have tried it on multiple hdd's. Even if the file originates on my ssd raid array, when I extract it to the same array, it takes longer. The only other difference from my old system to my current system is that I had 6 gig of ram as compared with 4 gig on my Sandybridge set up. Would that be the difference? Has anybody else noticed this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
D14 is also £90 odd, thats stupid money. £80 is as well, really, no CPU cooler should cost more than about £45 if its just a air cooled solution nomatter how exotic the design such as these "liquid CPU coolers".Quote:
Originally Posted by banwell
For larger archives it would make some difference, otherwise nothing noticable. If I remember right, compressing my 2GB Stalker SoC mod takes about 5 mins with 7zip using ultra compression. The resulting archive is about 850MB and takes around 1min 30secs to extract.Quote:
Originally Posted by mean6
D14 is also £90 odd, thats stupid money. £80 is as well, really, no CPU cooler should cost more than about £45 if its just a air cooled solution nomatter how exotic the design such as these "liquid CPU coolers".Quote:
Originally Posted by banwell
For larger archives it would make some difference, otherwise nothing noticable. If I remember right, compressing my 2GB Stalker SoC mod takes about 5 mins with 7zip using ultra compression. The resulting archive is about 850MB and takes around 1min 30secs to extract.Quote:
Originally Posted by mean6
I have the Kuhler 920 on mine in my sig and it bounces between 66C and 69C folding bigadv @ 4.8ghz and 1.4v. Overall I guess I am happy with it, I paid $119 from Newegg for it, but it won't be long and I will build a custom loop for my cpu and gtx580 to try and keep my office from being a sauna.
NH-d14 £65.39 at scan.co.uk. 2 fans and 10g tube of decent TIM. It ain't as expensive a cooler as some think.
But great write up Ket.
That's a personal preference. I'm using NH-D14 and it is worth every penny to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
Since I did not want to spend $250 for modular liquid cooling system, D14 works great and no need for any maintenance except for just cleaning the fans.
I used to have 212+ and D14 gave me 10c drop compared to it.
The temp never go passes 80c in LinX w/AVX 6600MB (ALL) run now.
Here is where my point especially is most prominent about absurd prices for some components. A Coolermaster Hyper 212 Plus is £16. A Noctua NH-D14 (best price I can find) is £68. The question is; is that 10c drop in temp worth that extra £52? Thats not even a 0.2c temperature improvement each £1 spent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
I think AMD and Intel have to realise its time to stop slapping on the IHS the cheapest way possible. Put it on properly and CPU temps would be quite a bit better. Even right now typing this I'm running some tests and 3 cores average 61c while the 4th core averages 69c. Thats just poor IHS mounting and as Intel don't even have the curtosy to just use TIM under the IHS for skilled folk to make use of a razor blade to skillfully take the IHS off and remount it, I'm stuck with that piss-poor temp on core #1 and nomatter what cooling I use, that delta is always going to be around 9c.
So basically people who spends $250 for modular liquid cooling system to even get 20c drop is waste in your opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
But you get the performance either way and it is worth it or not IS still a personal preference.
You obviously don't think it's worth it but some people do feel satisfied for spending $$ to get the extra 5c~10c drop otherwise impossible without getting the new cooler.
On the other hand, I agree with you on uneven quality of IHS.
My i5 has delta of 5-10c between hottest and coolest core.
And that is limiting my i5 to go higher clock.
But at the same time, 99% of Intel users won't be OC.
If they are to run only at stock, it won't matter I guess.
But for the SB K series, they are made for OC.
So at least for K series, they should have made IHS construction/craftsmanship quality better even with some extra cost.
i5 2500K is about $200 which isn't expensive to begin with.
I'd pay extra $20-40 no problem if the chip were made right way.
I have one core consistently lower than the other three. I am more inclined to disbelieve the sensor reading (or software) rather than the IHS isn't functioning properly.
Then either way, they should have made error free accurate sensor.Quote:
Originally Posted by banwell
I know it won't be 100% accurate, but seems like we all have 1 or more sensor not properly working if the problem is on the sensor side.
Choosing to use a water setup or something like that is always a preference. My point is manufacturers often charge outrageous prices for things that just aren't up to snuff for the price being asked of it. In the case of the NH-D14, if it was £40-£45 I don't think many people would have a problem with it. But at £68, it alienates more people than it entices to buy it. I would of picked the D14 instead of the ECO I'm using now if the D14 was a reasonable price. I favor workspace in a case primarily and the ECO gives me that in spades, a 212 Plus, D14 and the like don't. So in the end, sure, I probably sacrificed some performance for space, but with a average temp across all 4 cores of around 64c when they are all loaded to 100%, I don't think anybody is missing much. I'm probably over complicating things compared to how most people think things out :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
There is always going to be one core thats cooler than the others and one core thats hotter than the others. The delta for that is usually about +/- 4c-5c, anything over that you can feel justly hard-done by.Quote:
Originally Posted by banwell
Anyway, back on topic; anybody tried the new UEFI?
Hey ket, is there any way to get ASRock to give a little bit better support for Xeons on their 1155 boards?
My E3 1270 shows up as an i7 2600. The TDP is at least correct (shows 80w). I think it's just some microcode that has to be added, right? :shrug:
I was thinking if this 1270 bores me, I'll pick up a 2500K and play around with it. I need an mATX board to fit in my server, so I can't just dump my extrem 4 in, unfrotunately.
Btw, Bios v1.9 seems really stable so far. :up:
I know what you mean. If you think about the cost/performance only then what you are saying is right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
But when you are spending money, it is usually more than just cost/performance.
You chose more work space over performance. And I chose more performance over cost.
That is what I meant by the personal preference.
Hell, why does people want Ferrari over Toyota??
Aren't they both the same "car" that gets you to point A to point B, isn't it?
I've been using 1.90 since it came out.
No difference for me. (from 1.80)
It stays where it was OC wise. No issue that I've been experiencing so far.
But I'm not on Raid so not sure on those ROM update.
I can ask on Monday if Asrock have any Xeon SB CPUs to test on the P67 / Z68 boards, but any "support" for Xeon CPUs would likely be unofficial. If there are any Xeon SB chips kicking about testing would probably be delayed a bit. Theres some events coming up being prepared for.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Synthetickiller
Hey Ket. Look at this NH-D14 price!
Attachment 117775
NCIX member price. You do not need to pay the yearly membership.
Just sign up (if you don't have the account) and you can get to the member page and it is 49.99 (Can$).
I'm not sure it's still on sale but that is acceptable price range, right? :)
****I just checked the member special page and it is actually getting cheaper!! $44.99!! :eek: Only 25 left.
Anyone want this should grab it ASAP.
******Sorry my mistake... that was Thermalright Venomous X-RT 6 which is $44.99..
And the $49.99 NH-D14 is already gone... :shakes:
While I would be interested normally, I live in the UK :p: Pretty sure NCIX don't ship outside Canada, sadly :(
Ket, great info on the ASRock boards. I've followed your threads for some time now. I built a second SB system not long ago and ran with the ASRock (it's your fault:p:). Great deal and a solid performer! I've had no issues with either of my systems. I'm not running on the bleeding edge as I have no interest to try. Just rock solid 24/7 365/day performers. I'm looking forward to maybe purchasing the Extreme7 when available......That is one sexy board:yepp:
Brian
I'll take that as a compliment :D
My board is back from RMA.
update to 1.9bios through Instant Flash. I cannot fine the DOS bios in USB bootable flashdrive :S Will try it soon again. If anyone has any suggestions !?
Clock is the same even worse in aspect of vCore. 4.6GHz 2600K from 1.352 to 1.36 BUT Offset from +0.065 down to +0.060 - that's strange!!!
I'm waiting on gen3 mobos. Look nice. if not will go to z68!
That's not exactly out of the ordinary, particularly with the new BIOS, which I must admit has been quite confusing and disappointing. In 1.9, the setting for LLC seems to have a much greater impact on the voltage measured in UEFI. In fact, I had to re-do all my settings for 1.9, and I couldn't get find a nice sweet spot that I felt comfortable with, so I went back to Version 1.8, so I'd suggest trying that. But again, like I said before, that isn't out of the ordinary at all when Vcore is an offset voltage setting.Quote:
Originally Posted by BranFB
i5 2500k 4.8GHz @ 1.382~1.392v (load to idle, vdroop) on Air. 21.5hours stable. 1600 8-8-8-24 1T 1.515v.
Max 81c. Ambient 27c.
Great board for the price. UEFI 1.9 works just fine for me. No LLC issue I've noticed... Mines at lvl2.
But somehow turning down CPU PLL Voltage made it unstable... Not usually happening on other boards.
Took me a while but got it stable.
It gets hot so this is as much as this chip can go I think.
I have to get my RAM back to 1866 next.
Other voltage settings are on the screen shots as well.
I've done IBT and LinX many times. Nice 125~130GFlops stable runs in different size of tests.
Long hours on prime95 blend test were the most tough one to clear...
http://preview.filesonic.com/img/28/....thumbnail.jpghttp://preview.filesonic.com/img/95/....thumbnail.jpghttp://preview.filesonic.com/img/4a/....thumbnail.jpg
Its recommended only to update the UEFI if you have problems, or the general rule I stick to, update the UEFI if issues that are fixed could affect you in some way, otherwise skip the version. ;)
I'm always happy to be the test subject for new UEFI :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
What happen to your RAM? Weren't you running it 1866 8-8-8 at one point?
Yes. (Actually it was 1866 9-9-8-24) I had to make it to stock in order to get to 4.8GHz.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
(Look at my previous post with screenies.)
Now I've made it to 4.8 stable. So I have to make the RAM back to 1866.
That is my next goal. I'm pretty sure I can get there. :)
Anyway, I love this board. None works better for the price!
Ahh ok thought something might of been up with the UEFI and you couldn't run 1866 anymore. If anybody has any suggestions on UEFI features that would make the P67 Extreme4 better then by all means suggest them and I'll put them forward to R&D :up:
Ket question. I noticed with most options at default in the UEFI. My 2500K will not not go to 3.7/GHz in turbo mode (loaded). It hits about 3.4 at best. Seems I have to set the multiplier myself. Probably something I'm not aware of or normal?
Brian
Load UEFI defaults and see if turbo mode works correctly. Without knowing what settings you changed thats all I can suggest ATM.
Ok Ket, I'll try that and let you know the results. Thanks.
Brian
Ket, here is a shot with the UEFI default loaded. One other thing I've noticed. If the BCLK is set at 100, it actually operates at 99.8. If I set it to 99.9 or 100.1, it operates exactly at those settings. Nothing I'm concerned about, just strange.
P.S. Turning off spread spectrum brought the BUS to a set 100.0. But it had no effect on the turbo boost.
Attachment 117920
Can you flash to UEFI 1.8 and see if turbo boost works correctly then? Perhaps try putting a real world load on the system instead of a synthetic one as well, try converting a 800MB AVI file and monitor the CPU speed to see if it increases to 3.7GHz.
Has anyone been successful reading an IDE drive with this board, I'm just trying to save peoples data. I've tried 4 different USB/IDE controllers, no go. Could it be a UEFI setting I'm not seeing? I haven't tried a PCI-E/IDE card, I'm spending too much money, I do it for free.
are you trying to connect it to a usb3 port? if yes, try again in a usb2, usb3 may still have some issues. Also consider finding a ide-sata adapter ;)
I've tried all you said, including ide-sata adapter, but thanks. I could try wasting money on a PCI-E/IDE card.
Hey Ket I have a question about RAM OC.
I'm still a noob about OC RAM. I want you to take a look at my settings.
Thanks a lot in advance!!
When I had 4.6Ghz (1.315v), I could make my RAM to go 1866 9-9-8-24 1T 1.545v, VTT@1.051
Now I'm at 4.8GHz (1.384v), I needed my RAM to be 1866 9-10-9-28 1T 1.650v, VTT@ 1.077
Also this MB and RAM don't like lowering CPU PLL Voltage at high clock.... so I'm at default 1.832...
Both stable with HCI memtest and LinX Max run. But does this look right to you?
I'm surprised that I needed a big jump in terms of DRAM voltage.... (anything less than 1.65 will give me unstability, errors in memtest)
Also I've been messing around with VTT(VCCIO) and I found out that 1.077 is the sweep spot.
Anything lower will make my RAM unstable, anything higher will give me a bit lower GFlops in LinX and also more heat.
I get healthy GFlops gain in LinX (130+GFlops) but going from 4.6 to 4.8 makes this much difference in terms of the settings goes...
I know I have a 2x4G so it is making the IMC stress harder than 2x2G sets. Even I'm getting healthy GFlops and stable, Is the settings look OK to you?
I might can make the timings a tad better but as far as voltage goes, I got it stable with as less voltage as I can make it I think... Unless I'm doing something wrong...
http://preview.filesonic.com/img/31/....thumbnail.jpg
Ket I'm working right now so I can't try anything at the moment. Few things I can tell you as I've noticed that since I built it three weeks ago. I received my board with version 1.6. Without any bios changes, I noticed it wouldn't turbo up to 3.7. I have tested it while playing BC2 and using LinX also. So I flashed it to 1.8 soon after it was released. I again noted the same issue. Now I can set the multiplier to whatever I want with no other change and it will go to where I set it. So during lunch I called a friend with the same board. Only difference is he has a 2600K. He reset his bios 1.8v back to default. He tried LinX and BC2 also. It would only turbo up to 3.5. Notice both chips only turbo up about 100/MHz from their stock speed. It's not a big deal as I can obviously OC my system without issue and at low vcore to boot. But it's something I've wondered. Compared to my P8P67 (with 2600K) board, it auto turbos to 3.8 in stock form under any load I give it.
The higher your CPU clock the more VTT / vDIMM you may need as the IMC (Integrated Memory Controller) is on-die the CPU so as you increase clocks you are also putting additional demands on other areas of the CPU architecture. For 4.8GHz I'd say you are doing very well for such low voltages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tunagoblin
I never noticed turbo not working correctly, before I bring the issue up with my contacts can you try disabling the temperature throttling options and increase the power draw durations to make sure your CPU isn't throttling itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDM123
Thanks! I wasn't sure 0.2GHz makes this much difference to the other parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ket
I guess it reached its limit, though...
Ket, loaded defaults. Disabled thermal protection, but left everything else stock. Ran Prime, LinX (half hour each), played a couple of games of BC2 and it never clocked up above 3.4/GHz. I noticed the multiplier never climbs above x34. So I called my bud and he noticed the same thing. Though his multiplier never climbs above 35 (remember, same board but he's using a 2600K and UEFI 1.80). Has anyone else noticed this? I know a third guy who has an Extreme4 with a 2500K. But I haven't asked him to test his system yet. If you'd like screen shots I can take them. Or anything else you may require. Again I'm not really bugged by it. But I'm sure that's not how it's intended to operate when at UEFI default settings. If you're not looking, I'd bet you'd never notice. The SB system runs so well as it is :)
Brian
Can you increase short and long power duration limits to 150 and increase "Long Duration Maintained" to 5? If I'm remembering correctly how the new intel turbo boost works it fluctuates up and down all the time based on load and the maximum turbo speed (in your case, 3.7GHz) will never be maintained longer than 1 second with default power duration and long duration maintained settings.
I knew I couldn't stop OC...
5Ghz on first test. Prime blend 1 hr. (I know it's short but it's my first test.)
1.470v (1.464 load) It is way too HOT right now I know. But I found a way to make it 85c max late last night.
So I'll try that test tonight when I get home. I'll get there without reaching 90c....
http://preview.filesonic.com/img/f2/....thumbnail.jpg