***Official*** eVGA Classified SR-2 Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

What are your 24/7 stable clocks?

---

Running 4,2GHz(175x24,mem x10, uncore x20) on the CPU's 24/7 for the moment.
Settings now, top E-leet is idle and bottom one are load.
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/5486/settings.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

Yeah, you bet, you are far away. Go back and work more. :)

There is always good to get a good challenge. It may keep you awake a couple of nights, but usually will result in more research that gives better OC etc .. Just Ask MM about the chess-test, he knows all about it. :)

---

I belive you Sam this certainly will keep me up for a few nights now, damn :rofl:

It's not easy to get it stable over 200 bclk or shall I say stable enough for CB 11.5 :p:

My best run so far, not bugged:p:

Running with watertemps at 7C, radds sitting almost outside the window, 0C outside.

http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/384/cb2377.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mydog

My best run so far, not bugged:p:

Running with watertemps at 7C, radds sitting almost outside the window, 0C outside.

http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/384/cb2377.jpg[/IMG]

---

Good, it's getting much better, Don't give up, the only way is up. But you need a bugged one to break my record :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

Good, it's getting much better, Don't give up, the only way is up. But you need a bugged one to break my record :rofl:

---

Thanks Sam :)
Still got three more notches on the multi and maybe a couple of notches on the BCLK. :toast:

I just realized I can't even use my SR-2's as my main machines. SageTV won't launch because it has too many threads. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

I just realized I can't even use my SR-2's as my main machines. SageTV won't launch because it has too many threads. :(

---

Damn, man, I wish I had your problems... :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

I just realized I can't even use my SR-2's as my main machines. SageTV won't launch because it has too many threads. :(

---

I have never used that SageTV-thingy, but I've tired many SW and some of them can't use all cores, but none of them has complained about too many cores. Are you sure that's the problem? In case, that's not a SR-2 weakens, can't you find a up to date SW for what you need?

If SageTV can't run on may core, then it's in direct collision with both Intel and AMD's strategical moves towards multi-core and multi-sockets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

I have never used that SageTV-thingy, but I've tired many SW and some of them can't use all cores, but none of them has complained about too many cores. Are you sure that's the problem? In case, that's not a SR-2 weakens, can't you find a up to date SW for what you need?

If SageTV can't run on may core, then it's in direct collision with both Intel and AMD's strategical moves towards multi-core and multi-sockets.

---

As soon as I disabled Hyperthreading. It started up perfectly. But disabling it will cripple my folding@home work. On the EVGA SR-2 forums there are people saying that there are a bunch of issues w/ DirectX applications that if the computer has over 16 threads the application will fail to launch. Obviously poor coding on someones part but still something that has no real fix.

So I'll just set both my SR-2 boxes to the side and just have them run folding@home. Then pick up a Sandy Bridge system for a 24/7 machine. Quite the expensive fix, but it should be fun. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

As soon as I disabled Hyperthreading. It started up perfectly. But disabling it will cripple my folding@home work. On the EVGA SR-2 forums there are people saying that there are a bunch of issues w/ DirectX applications that if the computer has over 16 threads the application will fail to launch. Obviously poor coding on someones part but still something that has no real fix.

So I'll just set both my SR-2 boxes to the side and just have them run folding@home. Then pick up a Sandy Bridge system for a 24/7 machine. Quite the expensive fix, but it should be fun. :)

---

I see, yeah some SW still has a 16C-limit. Usually, the limitations is in DirectX 9.0, and in case you can fix it by modifying the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Direct3D in registry. Here is a good guide from Microsoft. There goes the SB fun, LOL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

I see, yeah some SW still has a 16C-limit. Usually, the limitations is in DirectX 9.0, and in case you can fix it by modifying the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Direct3D in registry. Here is a good guide from Microsoft. There goes the SB fun, LOL.

---

Thanks for the link. But I have one issue, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Direct3D doesn't exist. I have this, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\DirectX.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

Thanks for the link. But I have one issue, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Direct3D doesn't exist. I have this, HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\DirectX.

---

You can add Direct3D then:

1.Run "regedit"
2.Navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\, right-click it and choose New -> Key, named Direct3D;
3. then follow the last guide (with DWORD Value, etc ..).

But make a backup of your registry first, just to be on the safe side. Here is how to backup .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

You can add Direct3D then:

1.Run "regedit"
2.Navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\, right-click it and choose New -> Key, named Direct3D;
3. then follow the last guide (with DWORD Value, etc ..).

But make a backup of your registry first, just to be on the safe side. Here is how to backup .

---

Well thanks for crashing my dreams of a Sandy Bridge system. :p:

Now saying that, you are a genius. It worked perfectly. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

Well thanks for crashing my dreams of a Sandy Bridge system. :p:

Now saying that, you are a genius. It worked perfectly. :up:

---

You ain't seen nothing yet , LOL :rofl: I'm glad it worked :)
This will fix all other DirectX 9.0 related 16C limit too :)

That was a wet dream anyways, now you can settle down and wait for 10-12C dual-socket SB. Hopefully in 9 months, or so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

You ain't seen nothing yet , LOL :rofl: I'm glad it worked :)
This will fix all other DirectX 9.0 related 16C limit too :)

That was a wet dream anyways, now you can settle down and wait for 10-12C dual-socket SB. Hopefully in 9 months, or so.

---

Hopefully eVGA or another manufacturer will make an overclockable one again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

Hopefully eVGA or another manufacturer will make an overclockable one again.

---

Yeah, I think we can count on it. My bet would be on 12C/24T double-socket SB, and OC-able MBs from EVGA, GB, and maybe ASUS too. Because multi-core and multi-socket are here to stay, for sure.

What I want to see, is a "cheap" quad-socket SB, and a OC-able Quad-socket MB from EVGA, and hopefully others too. That would be a bit more tricky, tho. We have to wait and see, but I'm confident, we will see some exiting stuff on multi-socket in next round.

Headache #20 with these boards. 9 times out of 10 it will not POST when I install both HD6950s on the board. Occasionally it will POST after about 5 minutes. And once in a while i get a 'Watchdog timeout' error. Don't suppose anyone has similar issues?

@Lowfat
Running two HD6970s here and no troubles with booting, the board double pumps from coldboot but that's normal I've read. You're not trying to disable NUMA?


Still tweaking my setup and testing for max OC on the CPUs.
This is what I'm running 24/7 on WCG now.
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/2379/wcg247.jpg

My max OC now and best Wprime 32m
http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/4023/wprime2095.jpg

Ya it seems I have stumped upon a problem that many others have been having. For folding@home you want to run w/ NUMA disabled as we get a significant decrease in the time it takes to press a frame. So naturally I run w/ NUMA disabled. But when I bought a second HD6950 it wouldn't boot with NUMA disabled. No matter what clockspeeds/voltages I tried. It seems other people on [h] have had issues w/ disabling NUMA but didn't know that the second videocard they had was preventing it. However there are people running 3/4 videocards but not having this problem.

In other news, my E5645 SR-2 system is being a :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:. On their own each CPU is stable. If I enable both CPUs it is completely unstable. Please don't tell me I need to RMA another one of these boards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

Ya it seems I have stumped upon a problem that many others have been having. For folding@home you want to run w/ NUMA disabled as we get a significant decrease in the time it takes to press a frame. So naturally I run w/ NUMA disabled. But when I bought a second HD6950 it wouldn't boot with NUMA disabled. No matter what clockspeeds/voltages I tried. It seems other people on [h] have had issues w/ disabling NUMA but didn't know that the second videocard they had was preventing it. However there are people running 3/4 videocards but not having this problem.

In other news, my E5645 SR-2 system is being a :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:. On their own each CPU is stable. If I enable both CPUs it is completely unstable. Please don't tell me I need to RMA another one of these boards.

---

I've tested my CPUs on a UD7, and both where doing slightly better. I can't get the same with both on SR-2. So I've noticed something similar. I've never tried to push each by itself on SR-2 tho. Both together won't go further anyways.

This may be a normal behavior when 2 CPUs communicate, but it may also be a weakness in current BOIS too. I don't think changing MB would help, but you won't know before trying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

I've tested my CPUs on a UD7, and both where doing slightly better. I can't get the same with both on SR-2. So I've noticed something similar. I've never tried to push each by itself on SR-2 tho. Both together won't go further anyways.

This may be a normal behavior when 2 CPUs communicate, but it may also be a weakness in current BOIS too. I don't think changing MB would help, but you won't know before trying.

---

Both CPU's were used in an SR-2 before I bought them. He had them @ 195 bclk. I can't even get 150bclk stable with both CPU's enabled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

Both CPU's were used in an SR-2 before I bought them. He had them @ 195 bclk. I can't even get 150bclk stable with both CPU's enabled.

---

I see, I thought it was just a few BCLKs different. If it can't do over BCLK150, then something is wrong.

The different between 1 CPU and 2 CPUs should mostly be based on QPI. The MB uses the QPI#2 to establish a communication between CPUs. So that BCLK150 limitation can suggest something is wrong with your MB (chipset). I'm assuming you are using IOH=1.35v+ tho, because too little IOH can create such problems for QPI too.

I've tried ever variation of voltage/clock I can think of. I think there may also be an issues w/ the CPU1 slot. I disabled CPU0 and tried just Linpack on CPU1, it was unstable. I tried swapping the CPU's and the CPU1 slot was still unstable. I am going to throw in my E5649's from my other rig this morning to see if it helps. However chances are I'll be RMA'ing another board.

EDIT: Anyone know what the turbo multiplier is on an E5645?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lowfat

I've tried ever variation of voltage/clock I can think of. I think there may also be an issues w/ the CPU1 slot. I disabled CPU0 and tried just Linpack on CPU1, it was unstable. I tried swapping the CPU's and the CPU1 slot was still unstable. I am going to throw in my E5649's from my other rig this morning to see if it helps. However chances are I'll be RMA'ing another board.

EDIT: Anyone know what the turbo multiplier is on an E5645?

---

21 I think

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

21 I think

---

Yeah, they do x21 with turbo.

According to Intel spec they do 2.4/2.8GHZ (Core/Turbo), and that means x18/x21.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

Yeah, they do x21 with turbo.

According to Intel spec they do 2.4/2.8GHZ (Core/Turbo), and that means x18/x21.

---

So what does that mean. One core will do x21 while the rest will do x18?