Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiefTB
ChiefTB,
Could you provide more details on your 8GB setup? What manufacturer and speeds are you running this at?
Could you provide your settings in the Memory and Processor overide sections for fellow 8GB enthusiasts?
Thanks!
I'm using OCZ Platinum Series PC3-10666, part OCZ3P13334GK.Quote:
Originally Posted by HighTest
The memory settings are 1333MHz, 8-7-7-24-80, 1.82V. All other settings (RAM, CPU, bus) are left at defaults. (Though I turned on EPET under bus, but it's not related.)
Hey HT, long time no see.
Post #2000 mark passed, long thread guys. This board really must be something.
New downloads on Intel, Win 7 betas. Not sure if LAN v14.2 (seems like intel heard me) is beta only for Win 7 or also Vista/XP, it was available before as final but not for 7 if I recall correctly.
Also new INF for 7 and Matrix RAID as well as Marvell RAID. Guess Intel is gearing up for 7 too.
Regarding the BIOS image, IDCC reports the image size and it's below 2MB as it should be.
Anyone tried the 1997 and IDCC v4.2 beta already?
Thanks! It's real good to see you here too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manel
:up: Always providing great information. I think it's not just the board but the fellow ethusiasts contributing to this thread.
Can anyone please confirm if the power issue has been fixed with 1997? This has been on for too long and can't understand for the life of me why Intel can't just fix it once and for all, is it that hard?
If it wasn't for these little issues this would be an (almost) perfect board, right?
I'm curious about what would you guys change about this board if you could. Anyone care to post?
I guess I would loose the Marvell controler and get the TI FireWire in the PCIe bus instead. Add a clear MCH fan as default, low rpm for low noise. Rotate 90 degrees the SATA ports. SLI support. Front panel headers closer to the front since I have issues with case cable length. Extensive use of solid caps and ferrite core chokes. On board reset button as well (I believe the place is there for it). More options in BIOS and with better granularity.
Most of all, instead of good old BIOS, UEFI was in order, specially coming from Intel.
Do you think it's asking too much?
How does this board fare with Win 7? Have you guys running the RC had any issues so far? It seems it's snappier than Vista. Does it get along with the BoneTrail? Something I've been wondering about 7 and the new taskbar: is it possible to go back to a Vista like taskbar, instead of the new close-to-OSX taskbar? Anyone tried it yet? I hate the new bar, where it's not easy to see if it's a running app or a shortcut. Can anyone confirm?
Are the new Intel drivers (beta) working properly in 7?
Manel,
I have a feeling that the power issue is a hardware one and not BIOS related...dont really have any proof other than the fact that they cannot seem to fix it with BIOS updates. with 1997 if the power is cut to the PSU and you then power it back up the board still doesnt want to boot on first system power up and have to power cycle to boot.
W7 works well (i think that the beta was a better build than the RC), it is faster than Vista in many ways. and you can get close to the vista taskbar, but not exactly. the issue with not being able to tell if it is a shortcut or a running app is a configuration option where you can either have the taskbar simply highlight the shortcut to indicate that there is a window in that category open, or you can set it up to show individual tabs (similar to previous versions of windows) when there is a window open in that category. either way it works ok, but takes one more click to open a new IE window, for example...if you already have one open, need to right-click icon in taskbar and then left click "internet explorer" in the context menu to open a second window...or just Ctrl+N with the focus on an IE window, and a second will appear as usual.
as far as the drivers go, I cannot really say. I installed vista-64 drivers prior to the W7-alpha and beta ones being made available, and since the vista ones are higher in version # the system doesnt want to install the alpha and beta ones automatically. the vista drivers seem to work without issue under W7, though.
as far as the OS in general, workability and window management in W7 is far better than any other windows version, in my opinion, especially if you need 2 windows open at once. for example, you can drag any window by the title bar to the right or left edge of the screen and it will automatically resize to fill top to bottom on that half of the screen. drag the bottom of the window to the taskbar and it will fill current width from top to bottom, drag titile bar to top of screen and windows goes full screen. while in any of these autosized windows you drag the title bar away from its location and it goes back to the previous size. just wish they had it so you could drag the window to the corner of the screen and have it fill only that 1/4 of the screen...maybe later.
as far as the board, needs more internal SATA ports. also they need to have a few extra options in BIOS. something that would be really helpful would be the ability to:
1) save at least 2 different BIOS environments that can be easily selected and applied without having to manually set each individual settings every time (for example, if you want to have board OC'd for maximum CPU and maximum RAM performance for gaming, have one setting, and have another save slot so when you want to transcode video and need the ram configured in a different way to maximize large data throughput...which may require different host clockXmulti to achieve.)
2) add the ability to turn on or off RAM slots from the BIOS. this way you can have 8g of RAM in the system, but under your max OC'd environment for gaming where you want the RAM to operate at 1800+ Mhz you can turn off 2 of the dimms so that the MCH can handle it, but in environment 2 where you want max memory for video transcoding, etc, you can turn on the other 2 dimms and set the memory slower so the MCH can handle that.
I would put 8g of RAM in this board if these were possible, but since it isnt, not going to screw with opening the case and adding or removing RAM (especially with water cooling...not easy) and then having to write down settings someplace so i can reconfigure system in BIOS to be stable.
for me, it would be great if there were 3 slots to save settings so i could have max performance for gaming, max memory configuration for dealing with video, and then 1 more to set at like stock or underclocked even for when i am doing nothing intensive, such as web browsing or file sharing or using MS Office. if tomorrow they came out with this board and these options, or some other LGA 775 board with these options, I would buy it instantly.
I guess my point is that it isnt just about overclockability and this or that minor memory tweak being left out, but the overall easy of use of the board in drastically different scenarios...b/c not all of us just sit around playing computer games 24/7, and since summer has hit, would like to be able to just select my setting 3 in the BIOS so my computer room isnt 7 degrees warmer than others when all i am doing is drafting a post on XS!
sean
i haven't had any issues with Windows 7 other than IDCC won't run. ANd you can right click the task bar and change the grouping options and also tell it to show all the icons. My taskbar looks pretty much like what you would see in vista or xp
Thanx Sean, you've got a point there. The settings slots would be really handy I guess. I had the same thought of being a hw issue, the power thing. It's strange they just couldn't fix it yet.
A couple more mem settings would come in handy, and voltage finer granularity. Guess it might be the voltage regulator unavailable to provide finer tunning.
8GB would be sweet, seems 1997 handles it better. Not sure I would spend the money though.
Thanks for the tips on Win7. Guess gotta give it a try.
Pontius, any screenshots so I can see how it looks?
Yeah Here's a SS of my desktop. you can see on the bottom its pretty similar to vista, and also the square is the see through function, so you dont have to constantly be minimizing and opening windows if you just need to check on the progress of soemthing. It's been by far my favorite windows yet. Its way faster as well.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3343/...3971e130_b.jpg
oh and also i put pictures of this build on flickr but i forgot to show all of you guys, I got some good shots of the waterblocks installed too. It was on my phone so some of them are a bit blurry.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/3832945...7618067922434/
that MCH water block looks a hell of a lot nicer than the rigged setup i used, but oh well, works fine
yeah it worked out well, the way that backplate is supposed to go on didn't exactly work in my case (stood off the board to much) so I showed that picture of how i did it, not the best but it works.
Sean-E-Boy:
But i don't need a lot of them :-)Quote:
as far as the board, needs more internal SATA ports
I'm using cheapest middle level controller that you ever could fine (Dell PERC 5). Those are actually rebranded LSI and similar to LSI 8408E and 8480E. You'll get best HW solution for home. /This is not cheap LSI Fusion-MPT, but real LSI MegaRAID SAS. With rechangeable RAM and cache battery. Not such crap as Promise or ST-Lab which are software RAIDs, and not like Adaptec, which may be or actually soft-raid or with closed documentation, and finally not as 3ware which are expensive but with closed documentation again. If you really need good hardware RAID, only LSI (not all of corse, and their rebrands from Intel and Dell) and Areca are good enough./
I'm using one for hardware mirroring. They are supported well by most of modern *nix systems too.
But I DON'T RECOMMEND it to anyone for this reason:
PERC 5 described as using PCI-E 8x, while actually doesn't need more than 4x slot, as this board is actually using two PCI-E to PCI-X bridges each for handling four devices. So this board capable of handling eight SAS or SATA devices. But you'll get memory conflict for second PCI-E to PCI-X bridge, so on the Intel DX48BT2 board YOU'll NOT GET second port working, so you will be able to connect only four devices, this may be problem, but for me this is more than enough, so it's ok.
But it's rather better try to buy Dell PERC 6 for low price, as these are real native PCI-E controllers, but you'll be need provide 8x slot (so you'll loose your 16x on DX48BT/BT2). With this you'll able to handle eight devices with high perfomance.
Manel:
You'll better bid on Skulltrail board on EBay. It's actually a MP board, but just few needs more than four cores nowdays, you'll can be able to put two Core 2 Duo's or trying using it with single Core 2 ... .Quote:
SLI support.
This only one from Intel that will provide you with Quad SLI :-) It's had onboard issues codes LED indicator and all bells and whistles.
Or dealing with X85...
Forget to ask.
Does anybody found connector for external PC speaker on this board?
Pontius, thanks for the ss. Cool wallpaper, AK-47? You're right, it's so damn close to Vista you can hardly tell the difference. Only by the small square on the lower right corner. I thought the quick launch toolbar was gone, all shortcuts were on the taskbar, as well as running apps icons. Also, the status icons near the clock I thought most of them were also gone, at least by default. Maybe you can put them back there.
My issue with 7, at least from ss, was the new taskbar, too thick in my opinion, and the mixed quick launch and running apps squares on it, ugly!!!! Good to know it can be customized to near Vista.
Great waterblocks there. Looks good in the transparent case too.
dukz, SkullTrail is not for me. It's kinda cool but too bulky, MP not needed. Mem used is also not my game, too restrictive. For me this was just Intel showing off. SLI on it also doesn't suit me. I'm not paying nVidia for those PCIe bridges, not a single cent, since those are not actually needed anyway. I used to be nVidia fan (not fanboy by the way) but this SLI issue was what actually made me look the other way. Still use their hardware but only because I don't much care for ATI/AMD. When Intel has Larrabee by early 2010, it's switch time if it delivers. I'll never forgive nVidia for their act with the SLI issue, when everyone knows it's just a software issue actually. It could be available for our boards if nVidia would just release it to all. It's their loss I guess. I'd probably go for the SmackOver instead, if I wanted a new rig. But I love this one.
I don't think there is an external PC speaker header on this mobo. At least the manual doesn't mention.
New Intel Integrator Toolkit Framework and Intel Board ID Tool.
Rumour has it that Intel is preping SkullTrail 2, dual octa-core Nehalem-EX (total 16 cores, 32 threads, yaichs), 4 channel DDR3-1333 or -1600 per CPU, 4 PCIe slots for Quad-SLI or 4 way CF.
Intel is showing their claws...
Dear Friends:):):):
I hope you could give me some info to get 3.6 in My MB, cause I was trying a lot of methods without success.
I thank you very much your assistance.
CPU Q9650 stepping E0
MB DX48BT2 205
Mushkin 4 Gb's XMP 1600
SapphireRadeon 4870 512
CPU Cooler Zalman 12"Fan
Thermaltake 1000
PSU Be-Quiet 650 W
Sigh, skulltrail uses LGA771 chips, there's no way you could install lga775 chip there!Quote:
Originally Posted by dukzcry
Only lga771 E5xxx or QX9755s will fit into that board.
Paty,Quote:
Originally Posted by Patyabc
From the provided details you listed you are going to have issues. With 650W I would be somewhat surprised if you could overclock (OC) to 3.2 (host clock 360 x multi of 9), it really just isnt enough juice to get a good stable OC. I would suggest at the very minimum a 750W PSU...800 or 850 ideal.
aside from the power supply issue, you should have no problem getting to 3.6 or 4ghz even. on the other hand, this board isnt like a supercharged corvette, where you just pick a gear and slam on the gas, many of the settings in the BIOS will have to be changed from default and the various components (RAM, MCH {the x48 chip}, FSB, and the CPU) will have to be overclocked and tested individually to determine where OC weak points are with your particular rig in order to be stable at 3.6 or higher.
It is completely possible, but will take some time.
sean
Manel:
Wow! This one should beat SPARC workstation :)Quote:
Rumour has it that Intel is preping SkullTrail 2, dual octa-core Nehalem-EX (total 16 cores, 32 threads, yaichs), 4 channel DDR3-1333 or -1600 per CPU, 4 PCIe slots for Quad-SLI or 4 way CF.
Intel is showing their claws...
s0lid:
My fault.Quote:
Sigh, skulltrail uses LGA771 chips, there's no way you could install lga775 chip there!
Only lga771 E5xxx or QX9755s will fit into that board.
Hi guys, I just noticed.
Does anyone with DX38BT and Vista x64 have an IRQ problem with internal Intel Gigabit 82666DC-2 Network?
Mine reports -2 which means it's not functioning properly.
Intel INF update 9.1.1.1014 up on Intel...
Same version still beta for 7
alright well I got some time this weekend to try some oc,
I got it to 420 clock and it seems solid. I can't get it to 430 though. at 420 I have
400/800 memory 9-9-9-28 2t
vcore is 1.2125
fsb 1.350
mch 1.25
multi 6
when I brought it to 430 i got kept moving up until i had
the fsb at 1.375 and mch at 1.350 and still nothing. I moved up the vcore and that didnt help. I noticed that the jump from default vcore (1.21250) to the next is kinda a big jump, the next one i have is like 1.28 or something. Ill have to check but any ideas? If i can't go any higher im fine with that just not sure what to do next. I re read your posts sean, what exactly do I do with the GTL ref?
So, when you raise the host clock to 430x6, what happens? do you get a blue screen, or nothing at all, does it freeze and restart or blue screen during OS loading, do you get to the desktop? these different types of failures usually mean different things.
If you want to see how high you can take it, just crank the vFSB and the vMCH all the way up...you will be fine since you are on water, and it will only be for a short time anyway (although i run my q9550 with vMCH and vFSB at the maximum...6+ months now, no problems.) Also, cranking them both up to 1.4 for example can help to rule out if one of those voltages is the issue, or if it is the vCore that is stopping you (and it very well may be)
and if vCore is the issue and seeing that you still at default vCore, we can play with GTLs, but only if you intend on leaving your vFSB @ 1.35...if you raise or lower it after messing with GTLs, it may add some additional problems that would then require you to go backwards some to figure it out.
so i guess the question is: are you more concerned with reaching a particular CPU frequency or DDR3-speed, or are you more concerned with keeping voltages low and seeing how far it will go?
when I try to go to 430 everything works fine, no blue screens or errors or anything. When I run the intel burnin test that you gave me it fails.
To be honest, this machine is running almost all the time, although I am currently setting up a media server so Ill be able to turn this off a bit more. But still having really high voltages makes me think it would lower the life of the board?
This is my gaming rig, and it seems to me that having a more responsive FSB and memory would be more advantageous than a super high overclock? what is your opinion sean? thanks again.
Hi
Sorry to thread crash has anyone here got a Quad Core QX9650 or 45nm Quad running 8GB of RAM?
Please could you post a memset screenshot.
I have an ASUS P5E3 and for some reason it requires 1.51V on the NB to be stable using 8GB of RAM with the FSB @ 400Mhz and the DDR3 @ 1333Mhz (1600Mhz on the RAM just can't be stabilised).
Thanks
Regards
John
Pontius,
ok, so does the Intel Burn In Self Test crash, hang or blue screen your system, or just give you results that indicate instability?
actually, nevermind that question...
So, since you are making it into windows and can run the intel burn test to some degree, you are hitting mild to moderate instability. In order to tune GTLs, you will need to keep pushing the host clock higher @6x without raising the vCore any (increasing vFSB and vMCH are fine).
Like I said before, there is a progression of overclocking to take here that results in having all areas stable, but you have to push the components in a particular order so that "interfering instability" from other components is minimized...basically making your life easier. and again, they are:
1. with the cpu at its lowest multi and your ram slow and loose, either
a) max out the vFSB and the vMCH (you will be fine here since your CPU and MCH are on water) and start increasing the host clock until the system freezes on boot. Write down the host clock at which the system freezes on boot. Since we are running a low multi, we are (in theory) finding the "maximum" that your FSB can run at.
or b) increase the host clock with vMCH and vFSB at default until instability occurs, then raise vFSB a notch or two...if the instability is gone, continue increasing the host clock until unstable again. if instability remains, increase the vMCH a notch or two and see if it helps. Keep doing this until you reach voltages that you do not want to go above. similar to above, this is the "maximum" that your FSB can run with the selected voltages.
2. once you know the "maximum" FSB for your selected voltages, you can begin tuning the GTLs found under "Reference voltage Override" in the CPU page of the BIOS. there are 3 GTLs that you will primarily be concerned with, 2 here (CPU GTL REF0 and 1), one later (MCH GTL REF), and possibly MCH DDR REF (not much performace or stability to be gained here, though.)
make sure you write down the values listed when you change from auto to manual. you will want to change them one at a time and they will most likely need to be raised, but this depends on the internals of your FSB and CPU cores, so you will need to go both up and down to find the best setting.
One thing to remember here is that while this fine tuning allows for higher FSBs and CPU clocks at lower voltages, the results you will see while testing are rather unimpressive. So with the host clock at the setting where windows freezes on boot and without changing the multi or the voltages, increase the first GTL ref by one. save, restart, and again count how many times the progress bar goes by on boot. now go back to BIOS and change the same GTL ref down one from default. save restart watch the bar.
now that you have gone both up and down one from default, you should be able to tell which direction increases the amount of times the status bar goes by before crashing. if you cannot, go 2 up and 2 down from default and compare. Now that you know which direction to go, change the ref by 1 in that direction save and reboot, count status bars, increase again, count status bars....once you increase beyond the optimal, the number of times the bar passes will start to go back down. then you know you went too far, change the setting back to the level that gives you the longest boot before crashing.
Now move on to the CPU GTL REF1 and repeat the same process. if changing these settings allows you to enter all the way into windows, simply increase the host clock until it freezes on boot.
Once both CPU GTL REF0 and 1 have been tuned DO NOT CHANGE your vFSB.
3. Now having found the optimal cpu refs, increase vCore some and the system should boot @6x multi. Start increasing the host clock again followed by increasing the vCore until you reach the point where you do not want to increase voltage anymore. this will give you the true maximum FSB (well, almost true, unless your vCore and vFSB are maxed).
4. now you know pretty much exactly how fast your FSB can go and can start tweaking memory. with all voltages untouched from #3, drop your host clock back to 333 and, while keeping memory timings loose, change the memory reference frequency to 333 and the memory frequency to 1333 (this is pretty much the fastest practical combination that the x38 as configured in this board can handle) and save and restart. once into windows, run burn in test at least 6 times and make sure that all numbers are the same.
***note*** On the x38/48 boards from intel, resulting memory speeds as seen on the first screen of the BIOS page cannot be higher than the FSB speed.
***also note***this board is f-ing stupid when it comes to changing memory settings....often times you will need to restart several times or even cut all power and then restart a few times to verify that the system will not boot with a particular setting.
5. if burn test results are good, increase the host clock by 20mhz or so and repeat testing. if your memory are good quality, you can probably get the mem frequency into the 1800s (at 333x1333 you will reach this at 450mhz host clock), but you may need to do some research on your ram to see how fast others have gotten it.
as you are working your way up and you start to have issues with booting, or instability or crashing during burn test, you will need to increase the vMCH to correct it. if you have reached either the max vMCH or the maximum you want to run, then you can start playing with MCH GTL REF in the same way you changed the CPU refs. you should know, though, that there is much less functional adjustability with the MCH GTL than with the CPU refs...a few steps is all you will be able to change and see a difference, but those small changes will result in very large gains.
6. once you max out the memory speed at 333x1333, be sure to write down the frequency and the host clock numbers for your reference later. also note that it is unlikely that you will be able to run at this speed at higher multi's, but at least you the max that either your memory can run or the max that the MCH can handle.
Next you will want to go to BIOS, drop the host clock by 20 or so, and then change the memory ref and speed to 400x1600 (results in the same DDR3-Speed, but internal timings of the MCH are loosened). this may or may not boot, but if it does, start increasing the host clock by 5 or 10 and run burn test. repeat until you find the max host clock and memory frequency at this memory setting and write down.
7. continue to work your way down in memory speed....333x1333, 400x1600, 400x1333, 333x1066, 266x800 (unlikely to boot), 400x1066, and finally 333x800 (you already know the max for 400x800, so you dont need to do this again.)
8. now that you know the fastest FSB and the fastest that your memory can run with different memory reference frequencies and memory frequencies, it is time to test the potential of the CPU.
so, set your memory back to 400x800, and go to the max host clock that you found in step #3. save and reboot just to make sure that it still boots. once into windows, restart, go to BIOS and increase the multi by 1 step. save, restart, and run burn test. if everything is ok, restart, go to BIOS, and increase again. Keep doing this until it isnt stable or wont boot.
when you get to the instability part, either increase vCore if you are comfortable doing so, or reduce the host clock until stability is reached.
do this all the way up to your highest multi and write down the highest host clock for each multi and the resulting CPU frequency as you go.
you will find yourself reducing host clock frequency quite a bit as you get closer to your max multi. for example, my q9550 @ 6x could boot at around 505Mhz x6, but at 8x somewhere around 490 was the highest that would boot and the highest stable at 8.5x is 485 and that is with a chit ton of vCore...1.565 or so.
9. now that you know the maximum processor speed at each multi, look at your memory testing and see which setting would run at or above that host clock. pick the fastest resulting DDR3-speed, set it up in BIOS and drop your host clock by 20-30 but stay at highest multi. save, restart and see if it boots. if it does, run burn test 6-10 iterations and see if it is stable. if it is, then increase host clock by 5 or so and try again. if it isnt stable, decrease the host clock and try again. once you know the fastest memory speed that the MCH can handle at your highest multi you can decide if that is good enough or if you want the CPU to be faster and the memory a little slower.
if you choose the faster cpu, leave your host clock at the stable from #9 and change memory settings to next fastest from step #7. save, restart, burn test. if good, increase host clock a few and repeat.
Once you get to a combination that you like that is "stable" run 30 iterations of burn test and see if it passes. if it does, you can start reducing memory timings (start with going from Command Rate of 2T to 1T and see how it goes) if ok, lower the first timing option in BIOS then 2nd and 3rd...if command rate 1T just crashes system (and it probably will) decide if you want faster memory speed or tighter timings and either stay at current mem ref and mem freq and reduce timings with Command Rate at 2T, or reduce host clock until 1T is stable, or reduce memory ref and memory frequency until 1T is stable at the higher host clock.
ok, i am done for now. this should keep you busy for quite some time.
as far as voltages go, yes, increasing them will shorten the life of the component for which they are increased, but whether you will still have this board and processor by the time it dies is unlikely. the most common issue with operating at speeds requiring high voltages is not board or component failure, but rather a degredation of stability at those voltages, requiring you to either increase them more, or overclock to become stable again. but like i said before, my system is running at max vFSB, vMCH, and 1.565 vCore for 6+months. No degredation, no need to increase voltages further. I will for sure let all of you know when these issues come up.
on that note, the 1 voltage to be careful with is the vCore. I havent read anything about peoples processors being killed by high voltage so long as good water cooling is installed. That being said, i wouldnt go over 1.5 if you are at all concerned about killing your CPU...if you are less concerned and may buy another computer in the next year, stay under 1.6.
John,Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
no problem on crashing the board...different manufacturers, but surely the same component limitations.
The x38/48 chip is the limiting component on these boards. when all 4 dimms are populated, regardless of total ram size, it will take every volt that you can thow at it to be stable at DDR3-1600 with any respectable cpu frequency (host clock x multi). while the MCH can take every volt you can give it, you will need at the very least a 40mm fan bolted directly on the MCH heatsink, if not water cooling to keep it cool.
if you drop to 4GB of ram 2x2, you can get the DDR3-speed into the 1800s.
this being said, memory frequency is not everything. you can achieve real good memory performance by reducing your DDR3-speed and increasing the FSB.
With my setup, i am underclocking memory (DDR3-1617Mhz) with respect to the FSB (1940Mhz) and everest shows read/write/copy to be 10342/10286/10402MB/s. While not comparable to the Corei7s, its pretty damn fast, and much more well rounded than DDR3-1800 (450 host clock x multi 8.5) which tests out at 10608/9534/9593MB/s.
I also went down the road of trying to run 4 dimms of ram on this board, but with the intel version, 1.55 or 1.6 vMCH is the max. on others, you can get up to 1.7 or 1.8, which may be enough to get you stable in the 1600s with 4 dimms, but you will need water cooling for that!
Hope this helps.
Sean
holy :banana::banana::banana::banana: sean you are the :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing man. I'm gonna have to read that about 5 more times and get to business, probably in the next few days or so. Ill let you know how it all goes. thanks again!
Thank you very much Sean
Not meaning to jack your thread too much, but all I am trying to do is run @ 1600Mhz FSB with the DDR3 @ 1333Mhz...it's just unstable without 1.51V on the NB:(
You are right though, with just 2x2GB I can run 1600Mhz CL7 :)
I have contacted ASUS about this issue as this was the reason I had to RMA for a QX9650 as the 1600Mhz FSB Extreme Edition version did not work because of this very issue.
The Intel board does look nice, just a shame that it is still expensive otherwise I would jump on one.
John
New Intel Matrix up. Wrong date though
on the intel board with the x48, you can run 1600mhz fsb processor and have memroy at 1600 too, but you have to use the black memory slots and only the black ones...cannot run 4 dimms @1600...according to their documentation.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnZS
cant get to the DL for the matrix drivers.
edit: not though the windows7 x64 page, anyway. got it from the x64 vista one and i am sure that it will work.
sean
Okay, so I have been having a debate with a co-worker and wanted to know y'all's opinion:
Would it be better to have 2 GB of RAM running at 1600 MHz or 4 GB running at 1333 MHz..
Here are the assumptions: The processor and MoBo being used can handle either 1600 or 1333 MHz. Everything else is the same.
My thoughts are even if the speed limit is 80 MPH a 2 lane highway can not handle as much traffic as a 4 lane highway doing 70 MPH (at full utilization).
(Sorry Sean...that's as good as my analogies can get :p:. I need years of practice to catch up to yours.)
SG, depends on what you´re doing, really. Some tasks will take advantage of the extra RAM, others will benefit from the increased speed.
Lanes is not an issue since both will pump data through 2x64bit dual channel bus. Bandwidth will increase with speed though.
All of this was based on a general overall view. If you were utilizing all cores on your CPU, and all the RAM that was available (be it 2 or 4 GB). Would speed or "leg room" be the preference?Quote:
Originally Posted by Manel
I'd say most benches will improve with speed, as well as many games although others will benefit from additional mem (textures, AA...) and also encoding a bit.
Still, speed will surelly always beat quantity in performance I'd say, if you don't need more that is.
It really depends on what you are doing to stress the cores to 100%, because that can have little to do with the RAM since many operations can be queued and processed within the cache of the processor and never touch ram.
Now look at it from another direction:
If you have photoshop, open any regular camera image that you have and go to Image>Image Size>and change the ppi to 2400. Why does this take so long? If you look at the performance monitor, you will see that your processor is barely being taxed, but in the memory section there are page faults flying all over the place. In this case, neither the cache of the cpu cannot nor the currently paged bits of info in the memory suffice all the requirements of what the process demands. If you increase the RAM speed, sure it will help, but if you double the amount of RAM and leave the speed the same you will see great improvements in this process (fast hard drives help too).
there are two analogies that i want to throw into this discussion:
1) it works a bit like hard drives do...imagine you have a 32gb 7200rpm drive and you are copying files to it. as that drive become more and more full, the write speed slows down because there are fewer contiguous blocks of free space to write into and the drive has to search for an open space (or at least realign to one) before it can write. take the same 32gb capacity and increase the speed to 10k rpm and things go better, but it still slows down when it gets close to being full.
now if you replace that drive with another 7200rpm one, but the capacity is 64gb, it can maintain its higher rate of writing (although still slower initially than the 10k drive) much longer because there is ample free space to write into without having to search for it.
2) (this one is much more my style) Ok, so you have a family with 4 children (6 people total) and you need to get the whole family to an event 200 miles away. your family has 2 vehicles, a McClaren SLR 722S Roadster...0-60 in 3.7, max speed 208 mph, capacity 2) and a ford winstar minivan (0-60 ~10 sec, max speed 100mph going down hill with the wind, capacity 8) but only 1 person can drive. which vehicle will get everyone to the event faster (assuming we can go as fast as we like)? with the McClaren, you would have to average 8x faster than the minivan because you would have to make 5 trips (9 legs...5 there, 4 back) to get all 6 people to the event, but the minivan can do it in 1 trip (1 leg).
Now if only 2 of you needed to go to the event which vehicle is faster?
Manel, you are right that speed will beat quantity so long as you dont need more ram capacity than what you have...most of the time. there is a point where if you need large transfers to the memory (that are within your capacity) that slower memory will perform better than ultra fast and tight, simply because the MCH cannot load up the RAM before the clock cycle is over and the time to wait for the next cycle to load and finish (may have to wait 2 cycles, even) is longer than if the ram were just slightly slower to begin with and could load everything into one cycle, due to #1, above.
Sean
Sean, your analogies really are unbeatable!
I would take the McClaren anyday though.
Sorry I can't write much, my MS keyboard went dead. Using on-screen kb, believe it?
Agreed! On both parts... lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Manel
Thanks for the input guys.
Dear Friends:
My MB Intel DX48BT2 is totally compatible with windows 7?
Intel assures me with total support about this compatibility or Intel has discontinued all support for my MB?
thanks for your help.
100% compatible. as far as your operating system is concerned, you just have a regular X48 motherboard, and that's all it needs to know. X48 is not old or obsolete in any way. it's just that by now, all (most) of the software and drivers that needed to be written for it have all matured and shouldn't need further development.
Hey MB, haven't seen you around for a while.
Yes, no probs for either X38 or X48 with 7. Probably drivers for Vista will work in 7 too. Still, Intel is updating everything for 7, lots of beta stuff for 7 if you go to the downloads site.
We should see almost all development being made for 7 now, ancient Vista and XP will be slowly seeing less frequent updated software and drivers.
Look at network (82566 in our case) drivers, beta version for 7 is now 14.2 while we are still stuck at 13.5, there is a 14.0 though but somehow never got to the download page.
7 will be RTMed next monday (13th) so I guess drivers should be final by then. Many will have final 7 installed next week, TechNet and MSDN, sure it will leak out too (Torrent).
Don't much like the new task bar but it seems it can be made to look like the Vista one.
It seems there will be a Family Pack (3 licenses for a household) for 7. Cool!! M$ does it again. About time, Office has this for ages. It seems they are doing it right this time to avoid piracy.
I wonder, will the upgrade version of 7 work as a full install like Vista does? Just curious, M$ didn't stop it with Vista SP1, not sure with SP2 but guess not also. Will they allow it as well in 7?
Dear Friends:
I hope Intel will have enough support for windows 7, because my Intel GT Pro 1000 Card has no compatibility with the new OS, and we need a full .inf file with all components for my MB, and a new Bios maybe trying to fix the electrical issues too.
CPU Q9650 stepping E0
MB DX48BT2 205
Mushkin 4 Gb's XMP 1600
SapphireRadeon 4870 512
CPU Cooler Zalman 12"Fan
Thermaltake 1000
PSU Be-Quiet 650 W
Paty,
While there is no category for Windows 7 drivers for the Intel GT Pro 1000, there are Vista drivers. In my experience with W7 I have yet to have a vista driver not work in W7.
I am sure that there are exceptions to this, or maybe some limitations to the functionality (such as no connection teaming in W7 with the integrated LAN, while there is in Vista with the same driver) but W7s operating core is not vastly different from Vista (at least not in the way that Vista is different from XP) and the Vista drivers, including x64 should work in W7.
Sean
New INF 9.1.1.1015 up, dated 12 July. Funny the link works for the 7 version but not the XP/Vista one. Anyway, the 7 file says it's an all OS install, same as the Vista one, and both have the same size - they should be the same file I guess. Intel style.
Patyabc, doesn't the beta 14.2 for 7 work with your card? I haven't checked yet, nor do I know the GT Pro 1000, but it should support most Intel cards. If not, try the Vista drives like Sean said, they should work.
INF 9.1.1.1015 link for Vista seems to work now.
7 RTM was delayed it seems, guess it was not ready yet. Not good!!
Marvell RAID v1.2.0.69 is up. Again can't dl from the Vista link. Come on Intel, this is getting boring!!
Also, there's a link missing for an integrator... whatever.
Dear friends in this forum:
I was trying to understand why Intel is formerly unsupporting my MB, because they have no more Bioses for update and correct the electrical Issues.
That's the time to broke the obvius reference to another MB (58), to forget us, the X48 users.:(:(:(
Yeah you are Intel, the best of the best in the electronic World, and we will be happy with a new Bioses for our MB's, called 2000 or 2040 for THESE MB X38 AND X48, I am sure a lot of friends of this forum will so good for the confidence to Intel.:welcome::welcome:
Well, I was thinking aloud.
CPU Q9650 stepping E0
MB DX48BT2 205
Mushkin 4 Gb's XMP 1600
SapphireRadeon 4870 512
CPU Cooler Zalman 12"Fan
Thermaltake 1000
PSU Be-Quiet 650 W
IIA 1.1.3.857a for whoever uses it is available for dl, that's why it was missing yesterday. Still can dl RAID drivers though.
Paty, I understand your grunt against Intel, I have been disappointed as well, but I guess the fact is these mobos are now "old" and they must move on. I'm not sure they completelly set aside development for the BoneTrails, maybe not, but one thing is true, development at Intel is slllloooow. Some time ago I predicted that the BIOS version for these boards wouldn't go past 2000 because SmackOver X58 starts there. So far, I haven't been proven wrong but now I still hope there will be one more BIOS, that will come with the finally final IDCC, if it ever gets final that is.
Matt at Intel told me that they were aiming for a final IDCC till end of June, which is already gone, unless some weird bug would surface. Either it did or they're just testing it for a final release. With it a new BIOS would also be released, but since this was a long time ago maybe the BIOS version he was referring to was 1997, don't know.
Don't loose hope just yet.
My main issue is still the power thing (no boot after power out or disconnect), that's a major flaw that Intel seems unable to solve, although they claimed a few times it was fixed.
Also, some mem tweaks were promised.
Well, it seems after a while, if you're patiente enough, dl links at Intel will eventually work. Marvell RAID drivers are now up for grabs.
What's up with everybody, nobody says a thing latelly?! No reports of things that work better with the newer BIOS? Any higher oc potential? Any new records set?
Come on guys, is this thread dying?!
sorry Manel,
been working on Master's thesis (and no, not in computers!). Still check here a few times a week, but havent had tinkering time with the x38 in a while, and no one is looking for help OCing their system :(.
for me, bios updates havent done much since we hit the ones in the 1800s. they seemed to add some stability with memory OC, but all the later ones have been fixes that i cannot imagine a use for (other than IDCC, but dont use that any more either since im on water).
maybe in a few months i will play with submersed oil cooling or something, but nothing for now.
sean
Hey Sean
So, you're doing your Master's, hope all is going well. I can see a lot of work there, no time for tweaking for a while, right?
Submersed oil is something that seems to work (seen a couple of systems) but I wouldn't go for it myself, can't imagine having to deal with the oil everytime you need to have access to your hardware. Well, it's the next step I guess.
By the way, do you stick with water cooling or go beyond with the likes of dry ice, LN, LHe or whatever you fancy? Do you also go that extreme?
yes, very much work. have an excel file with all my data in it...just numbers...and its over 2.2 MB.
yup, still with water, but when (if, i guess) i get around to going gooey, i plan on implementing some alternative methods for chilling the oil. without having to worry about condensing water from air, i think the possibility exists to get the whole board real cold, not just the CPU. I imagine that the largest improvements would be seen with the MCH. 1:2 @ 500 mhz host clock anyone? (thats 2000mhz fsb and ram).
but who knows? it all comes down to cost. oil alone would probably be good.
Finally on vacation, time to get things up to date. No more automation for a while - I wish, I suppose calls will be coming in as usual!!!
Anyway, I guess now I have the time to take the system apart, clean up, re-wire, format, whatever.
Sean, 500MHz would be it, just not sure our board can cope with it. Other boardshandle it fine, even over 600, but the BoneTrail? Even on oil, do yoou think it will get there? Just thinking of the oil in my mobo I get the creeps!!
Intel have removed the Beta category in the download section, all drivers are (almost) final I guess. Still, LAN drivers v14.2 (still only for 7) are still beta although they removed the beta status in the initial description. Should work though. 7 has reached RTM 4 days ago anyway, some people should have it already. Beginning of August (4 or 6 can't remember now) will be readily available.
been waiting for the final version of IDCC but it seems it's a no show, still beta after all this time. Intel disappointed me on this one also, Matt said it should be out by the end of June - maybe of next year?!
Hiya!
IntelŽ Matrix Storage Manager v.8.9.0.1023 and IntelŽ 82566 Gigabit Ethernet PHY v.14.3 are available for download.
Manel, as you can see this thread is still alive (it is huge, but alive. don't worry ;))
petr0id, good to see someone still posting here. Yeah, I see it's not dead just yet, maybe just asleep.
Well, the Matrix Storage Manager is old news but Intel just posted the final v14.2 LAN for Vista/XP in the download page, finally. Still, you found v14.3, funny they're not in our page yet. v14.2 are already dated 29.06.2009 and it didn't come to the top of the download page. v14.3 are quite recent, 23.07.2009. Good find. I always look only in the download page for our board, not the download center main page. Still, the readme shows an earlier date of 30.06.2009.
At least they should update the BIOS with the newer SATA RAID drivers version, support in the 1997 only for the old v8.6.0.1007.
SmackOver is having it's BIOS tuned often I guess, version 4196 earlier this month. Every month a new BIOS, SATA RAID support is up to date there.
Still, IDCC for it is also on hold. When will our final be out?!
IIT v4.0.1.258 available on Intel.
Good news, been waiting for this for ages. It seems a chinese hacker (it seems those guys do all the hacking these days) by the name of Firewings_[CCG] from the Expreview enthusiast comunity has made it enabling SLI for "older" Intel chipsets. He did it on a X38 Asus Maximus Formula and the guys at Expreview confirmed it in a P45 Maximus II. Still, it wasn't fully working but 3Dmark Vantage score is promising. Not many details but it seems this is based on some software he modified. He's working on it to go public.
Great news.
Version 2000 BIOS is out :)
JohnQuote:
PRODUCTS: DX38BT, DX48BT2 (Standard BIOS)
BIOS Version 2000
About This Release:
• July 01, 2009
• BTX3810J.86A.2000.2009.0701.1128
• SATA RAID info:
Intel(R) RAID for SATA – v8.9.0.1023
• SATA AHCI info:
Version UPSD src 12-03-2007 for ICH9
• PXE Nahum info:
Intel(R) Boot Agent GE v2.09.00.02
New Fixes/Features:
• Fixed issue with INT15h E820h reporting overlapped memory ranges.
• Updated RAID option ROM: Intel(R) RAID for SATA - v8.9.0.1023.
• Fixed issue where SMBIOS Type 10 (On Board Devices Information)
structure for On-board LAN "Description" field is incorrect when
On-board LAN is disabled.
• Fixed issue where SMBIOS Processor structure shows incorrect CPU
types.
• Fixed issue where SMRR valid bit is not set.
• Fixed issue where VA option is not grayed out after supervisor
password is set.
• Fixed potential intermittent S3 failure.
• Added security changes.
• Added the Downgrade password security check.
• Changed HPET setting to default enabled.
• Added Fault Tolerant Firmware ID solution.
• Fixed string for “IntelŽ 64 Architecture Capable”.
• Updated support for high power PCIe adapters.
John, beat me to it...
Finally 2000. End of the road i believe.
Only IDCC missing.
They heard me on the RAID thing.
What Watercoolers are you using for the Northbridge of the dx48bt2?
Anyone tried BIOS 2000 yet? Any changes? I'm flashing this week.
Not much is new, mostly fixes which is normal at this stage.
Dated July 1st already, guess they've been testing it.
I guess final IDCC will be next.
Anyone else thinks this will be the last BIOS for this board?
At first there seemed to be stability issues with 2000, but i retract that now. It does seem, however, that 2000 likes to freeze while in BIOS...sort of like one of the 1800 bioses while in the recovery mode.
anyone else have this issue?
Sean, please elaborate on your experience with 2000 so far. So, stability is not an issue after all, right? But those freezes you mention are giving me the chills. I was gonna flash in the next couple of days but not so sure anymore. You mean it freezes while in BIOS? Under certain conditions or just random?
What about oc potential, or mem performance, have you noticed any new tweaks or improvements?
Keep us informed.
Manel,
Well, after flashing i entered bios and moved around from page to page looking for any changes, and about the time i got to the memory page it stopped responding. Then i rebooted, entered W7 and ran intel burn test and it froze again (i am guessing that i ran it too soon after booting and since it is so intensive it caused some other time critical process to delay?). turned it off and tried again the next day and everything seems fine, hevent tried cruising around the bios again, though.
likewise i havent tried changing anything in the bios and seeing if power issues remain (although i still think that this is HW related and not SW, as i mentioned before which is why it hasnt been fixed).
sean
Hey Sean
Did you notice any changes while you were looking around the BIOS? Before it froze that is.
I hope this is not a mem issue, I believe it was looking good in that department. Maybe it was just one of those things.
I'm inclined to be with you on the power issue, being a hw thing, but for the life of me I can't imagine what kind of hw problem it could actually be. Anyway, Intel says it was fixed back in version 1893 if I'm not mistaken. Still, the problem is not fixed yet so can't imagine why they say it's fixed.
Did you get your hands on 7 RTM yet? Or still on RC? TechNet and MSDN have it already so I guess some folks should have it already, torrent should be available as well I guess.
No, there didnt seem to be anything different, but i recall the previous issue where it would freeze in recovery mode being an undervoltage issue of some kind (memory?)? but pc ran all night last night without any issue, nothing intensive, though, just torrents.
I dont remember which one it is, RTM i think...its the 7100 build. i do know that it is the 2nd version of W7 for me, and there are some things about it that dont work as they should, but i see those issues primarily on my laptop which was only "Vista Compatible" or "Vista Ready" whichever one implied the least amount of compatibility, so that could be the cause. Seems to work great on my x38, some issues with artifacting the desktop when the taskbar is set to autohide and you move it from the bottom of the screen to the side or top.
Sean, I have had it freeze up in the bios in recovery mode as well(after 2000 bios upgrade), after hard power cycle though i managed to get back in. As usual the reset back to default then reset everything worked like a charm. I just shrugged and said hell its a bonetrail, it likes things like that.
Just an update on a previous issue with 4870 throwing the low voltage lights at restart only, hard boot ok. It seems that went away when I upgraded my power situation. Bios 1782 helped a little for some reason, could get a little higher clocks out of it. Problem fully ceased with power booster though. Think I was marginal, then when overclocked it was just enough to trip.
hey everyone. I'm probably gonna wait on flashing the bios as well. as for windows 7, I'm going to wait till after quakecon before installing the RTM version. (I'm on msdn). right now I'm still on the 7100 build as well. Ill let you all know how that goes, but so far my experience with it has been fantastic! Anyone going to Quakecon?
Nice that i soldered one old crappy russian switch to choice between BIOS modes :<Quote:
Sean, I have had it freeze up in the bios in recovery mode
So haven't any needs to open case anymore.
Did someone try Wake-On-Lan? Tried many in many ways, and no reaction...
Man, had my rig powered down (umpluged from the socket) for some time while waiting for my MS keyboard to be replaced (went dead) and when powering back on guess what? Yes, the usual quirks that this BoneTrail just loves to take as through till it finally boots. Did I miss that already!
It was either the 3 long beeps (mem issue) or just plain fans spinning full speed but no boot. This board has the temper of a woman!
Anyway, glad to have it back up and running finally.
I was so willing to update to 2000 but now I kinda feel like I shouldn't anymore, from your experience. I haven't had the need to go into recovery mode but will it freeze also when you enter BIOS normally?
Intel download page for all OS is now Not Found!!! WTF
Hey guys,
previously I was posting here my troubles with OCZ memory.
- I had 1st pair OCZ3P1600EB4GK(OCZ DDR3 PC3-12800 Platinum Enhanced Bandwidth Edition), but I wasn't able to get it on 1600 FSB
- RMA -> Second pair same issues in Memtest, random reboots, very unstable at 1600
- I bought new PSU 625W -> 1250W and situation got better. Random reboots resolved. But memory still not fine
- RMA from Czech Republic to Netherlands to OCZ factory. New memories same issues
- So I used PC on default 1333 FSB, which worked OK
- As time passed and DDR3 price went down I bought OCZ3X16004GK (OCZ DDR3 PC3-12800 Intel Extreme Edition)
>>> Bang all issues resolved :-) I'm now fine at 1600 FSB. Using XMP profile. CPU at 2,8GHz with default voltage. All test fine. PC is very stable. No power on/watch dog issues.
So guys if you'll have troubles look for stronger PSU and try another memory. OCZ Platinium edition is just somehow not compatible.
I have now 4 GB of memory. I would ask if some of you have 8 GB on 1600 FSB?
Hey Guma
Yes, OCZ mem with this board has been hard sometimes, don't know about other brands though.
I was kinda eyeing the Corsair Dominators, maybe they release dual channel kits again, now with the P55 coming up and Phenom II, DHX+ looks sweet.
Good to know your problem is now solved. Maybe it's just the Plats that don't get along with the board. The Intel Extreme Edition were designed for this chipset so I guess they had to work flawlessly.
8GB on 1600 even on X48 is not officially supported I believe, but I think some people here hsve it working. Not sure though.
Manel I have had it freeze up in both recovery and normal, smack the woman even though she has been told many times, it will make you feel better. I just set back to default and reset all my settings seems to be good, but then again i haven't found the need to go into the bios recently. You will sleep better knowing we all have to beat this woman of a board to get her to work. Once shes working though it is hard to stop her.
Hey Manel, my plans are like this:
- To put CPU to 3,2 GHz and make it stable. Test for month or longer to verify issues, stability and heat. Save configuration.
- Go back to 1333 FSB and put 8GB RAM. (I'll try to use my both OCZ kits extreme-OCZ3X16004GK + platinium-OCZ3P1600EB4GK)
- Hopefully if it will work on 1333 FSB, so then I'll go to 1600 :-)
If it will not work maybe later DD3 memories with lover voltage (1,65V) will work better.
- I'll put here my results
In BIOS I'm really missing feature to save more then 1 configuration. There is only optimal defaults, nothing else. I'd like to have saved about 5 configurations. Isn't there any trick? My trick is in pencil & paper :-) Or may I use Intel Integrator Assistant?
I had no issues while updating BIOS to 2000. Only boot CD not recognized my DVD drive, so I updated by using EXE file without issues.
- Right now I noticed that I had enabled RAID. I think I read somewhere that it is needed to enable Native mode. Ou... so possibly this was my mistake.
As I understand it, the issues (freeze) only happen while in the BIOS, right? No problems while in normal (Windows) operation, correct? If that is so, I don't need to enter BIOS that often, guess flash it is.
Anyone noticed any performance improvements, like higher clocks or lower voltages?
This board we have is either a nice lady when she wants to, but she can be a naughty girl too. I guess it's turn on actually!!
Anyway, Guma, 8GB@1333MHz shouldn't be an issue I guess (if those OCZ sticks behave). 1600 with 4 populated slots should be challenging, hope you can get it working. I was hoping to do that too sometime, I'm also kinda expecting to get some low voltage (1.65V) kits when the new dual channel ones come up for the socket 1156 boards, should be soon enough.
Intel should be making changes to the download page, some pages are still "not found".
Guess maybe they'll release a new BIOS to fix the freeze issue, that would surprise me, going past the 2000 mark!!
Just read Corsair is in fact going to launch new mem kits for i5 platform, even with sticks of 4GB densities. Cool!! I don't think our boards support 4GB sticks, not sure though. Have to read the specs.
Intel download site is still not working properlly.
They have already Pre-release BIOS for the P55 boards (4 models) but there is no info about them. Intel might have shot itself in the foot with all this i3/5/7/9 thing. Although it makes sense to divide into performance categories of course, having i7 in two different sockets for example will make things hard for some people. Still, those who build their rigs (like us) will be properlly informed when doing it, but it will be difficult for some.
BIOS for P55 boards start around 3000, still can't understand BIOS numbering scheme for Intel.
They're not answering emails regarding IDCC anymore, on vacantion maybe?!
Manel,Quote:
Originally Posted by Manel
After updating BIOS to 2000, i went on vacation for almost a week (off and unplugged). I turned it back on today and it booted up fine. Also, I haven't had any of the problems with BIOS freezing; that being said, I also haven't been doing any OC'ing for a while. Everything is running stock speed. Not sure if this information helps any, but there it is...
Hey SG, thanks for the tip. I guess I'll have to flash to be sure. Maybe it's one of those things, either you have it or you don't.
Good to know about the freeze issue, that surelly makes me feel more confident to flash to 2000.
I'm also on stock settings now, haven't Oc'ed in a while also. No need to right now. I'll be back to it soon just for the rush, but stock is good enough for normal use.
Does your board cope well with the 4 sticks of mem? Are they running at 1600?
No, Unfortunately it can't get it to run all 4 sticks at 1600. Other than the speed, everything works perfectly. I was debating for a while about switching to 2x 2 GB stick (or even 2x 4 GB), but really couldn't justify the extra expense. Since I am not really doing any OC'ing, i figured 4X 1 GB sticks running at 1333 would suffice for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manel
That's odd, the DX48BT2 should have no problems with 1600 (guess not even DX38BT), although officially I believe 1600 is only on 2 populated slots, not all 4. Anyway, Intel should have already solved that issue, I guess it puts too much load on the mem controller, although other manufacturers don't seem to have a problem with it. Still, it's Intel...
2x2GB should be able to get there tough, not sure the board supports 4GB sticks. I was looking at the manual but nothing is mentioned, only the 8GB limit. I guess it does, two sided sticks I guess.
Hey guys, check this link:
http://downloadmirror.intel.com/1788...leasenotes.htm
It's release notes for Intel Matrix Storage Manager.
Check the number of "Known Issues". I hope there wil be a lot of BIOS and Storage manager updates...
Guma, I didn't bother to read it at the time but man, there sure are a lot of open issues. A lot more open issue than the fixed ones. Since it's Intel, I guess most of them will keep unsolved, or maybe not.
New Marvell v1.2.0.7100 RAID drivers.
Anybody knows if are available Win 7 x64's Audio Driver for the DX48BT2 motherboard?
Congratulations for this great forum and nice thread that refers The DX38BT and DX48BT2 Motherboards.
Thanks a lot.
Hey BT, welcome. Cool name by the way!! :-)
If you have the time and patiente to read through the thread you'll find usefull info here.
Audio drivers have been somewhat of a slow come by, updates are very rare, at least Intel won't update them often. If you read through the readme files though there are driver versions we never get to see. Typical for Intel I guess.
They have most drivers for 7 but guess audio is still on hold, maybe you can try the Vista ones, usually they work fine.
Thank you for you comment Manel.
Then I try to install the Vista's drivers and sorry because I didn't find out information here in the thread before of my question's post.
I hope that Intel's developers finishes quickly all full drivers to Windows 7.
Regards.
Thanks a lot.
BT, did it work with the Vista drivers?
New Intel LAN drivers v14.4, we didn't even get to see the v14.3 though.
BT, the audio drivers are not developed by Intel, IDT provides them to OEMs. But Intel doesn't post them that often though I guess, the readme mentions lots of intermediate releases we never get to see.
Its also possible that IDT just keeps real good records of their internal beta or pre-beta builds and includes those notes in the alpha release notes so that we know what other issues have been addressed prior to a released package.
Sean
If you read the release notes you'll see (if I recall correctly) that some of the intermediate releases that were not released by Intel are in fact WHQL'ed which means these were final builds with MS Labs' certification. Those had to be out for someone eventually.
Anyway, maybe Intel found that the changes wouldn't be significant or even address issues with the codecs in Intel boards.
I am getting the same problem with my new Q9550.Quote:
Originally Posted by mpeg3s
"Unknown device" in Device Manager, and "Genuine Intel, Supports 64-bit" in the BIOS (v2000). Should I drop to a different BIOS? 1902 or 1997 or something else?
I am also getting intermittent lockups while in the BIOS, and the "thermal margin" in Hardware Monitoring shows 0*C.
My goal is simply 8.5x400 w/DDR3-1600. I have an HX620 & both the CPU & X38 are under water. I am running these G.Skills, and don't mind dropping to 2x2B if necessary. My VID doesn't show up in CPU-Z, but shows like 1.1v-1.2v in BIOS - as you know, next step is 1.28v.
EDIT:
I tried to roll back to 1997 & it froze. When I pulled the plug, it was still 2000. Now my VID in CPU-Z moves between 1.050v, 1.113v & 1.175v depending on load/multi. But, device mgr still shows unknown device - but 'My Computer' properties shows Q9550 & so does BIOS - strange.
Side note: does anyone know what size threads are used on the Swiftech MCR120-FK? I have one I'd like to add to my loop, but need to replace the 1/2" OD push-connex with 1/2" barbs.
-bZj
Hello Manel, thanks for your interest and your replies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manel
The Vista drivers works fine via SPDIF output with a Digital cable, but when I try record audio with a microphone, I had problems with thumbs over the music.
I contacted to Intel and I asked them about the situation with Official Audio drivers and they answered me that the developers are working on it and that coming soon the audio drivers for Windows 7 will be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manel
Regards.
Hi down8, long time.
Have you tried updating to the latest INF, maybe those will take care of the Unknown Device. Did it only appear when you switched to the new proc? Odd.
In HW monitor, maybe you have the processor too cool since you're on water. Maybe the temp measuring range doesn't reach that low and it shows 0degC when out of range. I believe I have the spec sheet for the HW monitor chip, I'll check. No, temps are within 0..127degC, guess you don't have below 0 temps.
BT, are you sure the problem is not with your mic? It could be the drivers yes but did you try another mic or didn't it happen on Vista?
Intel's answer is always the same, it will take long I guess. Between IDT releasing them and then Intel testing internally and releasing to the public, well...