ASUS Maximus II Formula - new P45 king?

I got problem installing WindowsXp 32bit with all HDDs in AHCI mode.

I downloaded floppy creator from INTEL site for XP 32bit and while it is zip file I extracted content to root of my 2gb Kingstone (instruction says it should be exe :eek:).

I set in BIOS in usb devices that USB will be emulated as Force FDD.

I hit F6 button but in menu it recognizes my Flash drive but I got error:

"File txtsetup.oem caused an unexpected error (1) at line 1747 in d:\xpsp\base\boot\setup\oemdisk.c .

Press any key..."

Anybody?

I do not have floppy as most of us probably.

Cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ViViD

Hi Happy New Year Friends
Any 1 Can Get 500 FSB With Q9550 On This Board?

EveryDay I Try But I Can't Get More 490 On Setup With 1.65 Volt CPU And In Windows With SetFSB 499 But After 20Second Hang In System And Then Reset......

---

I need alot of cpu clock skew and nb clock skew to get my 9550 to 500 fsb, its 3d stable as I'm able to becnch with it at 500fsb, problem is ram at 1200MHz bsod my rig, running 1:1 is ok tho but PL11 is needed for a stable boot.

How much cpu / nb clock skews are you using?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furiøùs

How much cpu / nb clock skews are you using?

---

I'm not at home atm, once I get there I'll check my setting and post the info.
Going to power up the new MIIF so I will confirm my quad/500FSB settings


Second MIIF is up and OS is installing...
NB temp 35c
Mobo temp 29c
On Air :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seban

I got problem installing WindowsXp 32bit with all HDDs in AHCI mode.

I downloaded floppy creator from INTEL site for XP 32bit and while it is zip file I extracted content to root of my 2gb Kingstone (instruction says it should be exe :eek:).

I set in BIOS in usb devices that USB will be emulated as Force FDD.

I hit F6 button but in menu it recognizes my Flash drive but I got error:

"File txtsetup.oem caused an unexpected error (1) at line 1747 in d:\xpsp\base\boot\setup\oemdisk.c .

Press any key..."

Anybody?

I do not have floppy as most of us probably.

Cheers

---

maybe i missed something but what do you need a floppy/usb drive for to install XP? raid drivers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 64dragon

maybe i missed something but what do you need a floppy/usb drive for to install XP? raid drivers?

---

I need to install AHCI drivers as it has no native support in Xp.

anyone know of a possible workaround for soundcard issues?

I have the SupremeFX from my Maximus X38, digital audio for that board was on the board itself not on the supremeFX card.
Vista sees the audio card and installs drivers but defaults to digital output and seeing as I have no digital out I therefor have no sound, anyone know of away to force analog output?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

anyone know of a possible workaround for soundcard issues?

I have the SupremeFX from my Maximus X38, digital audio for that board was on the board itself not on the supremeFX card.
Vista sees the audio card and installs drivers but defaults to digital output and seeing as I have no digital out I therefor have no sound, anyone know of away to force analog output?

---

I want 500x8 hurry up.

Just kidding :D. Im not exactly sure, but im 99% positive you tried this but if your running Vista, control panel, sound, see what the default device is, right click it properties and see if you can change in it there.

500x8 is priming now, I'll share my settings when there solid...

Cant get the soundcard to show anything other that digital tried control pannel ect with no luck...used soundmax and realtek drivers both no worky.
I'm going to try to squeeze Asus for one, if no I'll grab a aftermarket, no biggie its the wifes rig so who cares if there is sound...now if there were only a way to remove sound from her:rofl::rofl::rofl:

:ROTF: If only :p:

Cant wait. hope your CPU and NB clock skew settings can help me to getting this stable.

I can tell its going to be rewarding to get it going heh.

Im going to have to run the ram at 1000 (1:1) but im going to tighten the timings up real nice. so i hope my read doesnt suffer too much, im currently at 1081.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

500x8 is priming now, I'll share my settings when there solid...

Cant get the soundcard to show anything other that digital tried control pannel ect with no luck...used soundmax and realtek drivers both no worky.
I'm going to try to squeeze Asus for one, if no I'll grab a aftermarket, no biggie its the wifes rig so who cares if there is sound...now if there were only a way to remove sound from her:rofl::rofl::rofl:

---

A man can dream. :D

How's the OC going Grnfinger?

Little OT,

Quick question about page files in Vista 64. I got 4gb of RAM so I assumed I can cancel all page files, but some websites recommend leaving them no matter what and others opposite :D (hehe as always).

How are you doing it ppl - I am new to vista...

Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seban

Little OT,

Quick question about page files in Vista 64. I got 4gb of RAM so I assumed I can cancel all page files, but some websites recommend leaving them no matter what and others opposite :D (hehe as always).

How are you doing it ppl - I am new to vista...

Thanks

---

Not sure about others here, but for many years I have been moving my paging file to a dedicated partition I created specifically for it. And then having the system manage it itself regardless of the amount of physical memory I have. I then disable all paging on every other partition and drive including the OS partition/drive.

This has worked well for me for many years. Its usually beneficial to make sure you keep the paging area on the fastest area of the drive, or near it. I usually create 3 partitions within 2 volumes. One volume with 2 partitions for the OS/simple small apps, and the second partition on the same volume for the Pagefile/Internet Cache, and the 2nd volume for frequently accessed programs or large programs like games, stuff I want to remain quick. This way I can be sure the background process of paging and frequent file caching wont interfere with constantly moving my frequently used apps/games data around all the time. Helps to reduce how often you need to defrag as well. I think, but I may have this wrong... lol

Anyone else have a better way to deal with the paging system? Other than the obvious more memory idea...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seban

Little OT,

Quick question about page files in Vista 64. I got 4gb of RAM so I assumed I can cancel all page files, but some websites recommend leaving them no matter what and others opposite :D (hehe as always).

How are you doing it ppl - I am new to vista...

Thanks

---

Personally I leave it alone...

I disable
Superfetch
Indexing
Defender
PC tablet
Fax
Telephoney

Then I leave UAC turned on but adjust the admin account to elevate without promting, so you dont get the anoying popups all the time but retain the security.

It will also allow programs to auto start without promting, so stuff like Everest will auto load without permission.
You can also turn on the secret admin account wich is better than the default admin account which is limited.

Onced tweaked properly Vista is really a decent OS, plus the eye candy is nice:up:

You want any tweak instructions lmk

Leave Superfetch, you may aswell use XP if you don't like it (one of vistas good functions).

Leave Page File under Windows control or make it the Windows REC Static size so it don't fragment as much as it grows/shrinks (it wont).

Has anyone tried BIOS 1901? My MIIF is boxed up, I'm waiting for a reason to open it back up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by humeyboy

Leave Superfetch, you may aswell use XP if you don't like it (one of vistas good functions).

Leave Page File under Windows control or make it the Windows REC Static size so it don't fragment as much as it grows/shrinks (it wont).

---

All superfetch will do is make your hdd's die an early death.
I have tested Vista with it enabled and disabled, of little benifit to run it unless you like the constant clacking of your hdd's...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiranui Gen-An

Has anyone tried BIOS 1901? My MIIF is boxed up, I'm waiting for a reason to open it back up.

---

no link on Asus site or forums so I havent had a chance to test it yet:shrug:

Anyone have a working link?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

no link on Asus site or forums so I havent had a chance to test it yet:shrug:

Anyone have a working link?

---

Seriously? I just went through the Asus Download page and looked for everything for the MIIF, and it was right there in the BIOS section. Here's a link: http://dlsvr04.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/...rmula-1901.zip

Description Maximus II Formula 1901 Bios
Improve Memory compatibility

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

All superfetch will do is make your hdd's die an early death.
I have tested Vista with it enabled and disabled, of little benifit to run it unless you like the constant clacking of your hdd's...

---

That's total nonsense, Superfetch is using the Memory.

Indexing uses the HDD more and I disable it.

A modern HDD's MTTF is more than you will ever need anyhow.

Stick to OC'ing mate and I stick to Beta Testing MS OS's officially and understanding how they work. ;)

I previously had 2 Raptor X's and I can tell you they are well noticeable when clanking as you put it, its not Superfetch that does it, its indexing and System Restore and there is plenty of guides around to tell you how to tame down a HDD in Vista.

A HDD is the oldest slowest bottleneck of any PC and you want to keep OC'ing the tits off of all hardware but slow it down even more because its waiting on the HDD ?

The best advise I got years aback from a MS rep was to stop buying faster CPU/RAM etc and get HDD as fast as possible, that meant buy fastest modern HDD (at that time) and Raid 0 2 of them.

Best advise I ever got.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shiranui Gen-An

Seriously? I just went through the Asus Download page and looked for everything for the MIIF, and it was right there in the BIOS section. Here's a link: http://dlsvr04.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/...rmula-1901.zip

Description Maximus II Formula 1901 Bios
Improve Memory compatibility

---

Both Taiwan and NA FTP sites do not show it for me...thanks for the link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by humeyboy

That's total nonsense, Superfetch is Memory.

Indexing uses the HDD more and I disable it.

A modern HDD's MTTF is more than you will ever need anyhow.

Stick to OC'ing mate and I stick to Beta Testing MS OS's officially and understanding how they work. ;)

I previously had 2 Raptor X's and I can tell you they are well noticeable when clanking as you put it, its not Superfetch that does it, its indexing and System Restore and there is plenty of guides around to tell you how to tame down a HDD in Vista.

---

I beta test for MS aswell and have for along time

I'm well aware of what Superfetch is and how it works, imo I feel its of little value and choose not to run it, with indexing turned OFF and I always disable system restore I have CONSTANT hdd activity with superfetch enabled, with it disabled it idles nicely.

My E8500 is now @ 4.5GHz stable in prime 95 and gaming :woot:
Started with skorpon's settings as a base and now I have this

Processor:
Ai Overclock Tuner: Manual
OC From CPU Level Up: Auto
Ratio CMOS Setting: 8.5
FSB Frequency: 530
CPU Clock Skew: Normal
NB Clock Skew: Normal
FSB Strap to North Bridge: 333MHz
DRAM Frequency: Auto

DRAM CLK Skew on Channel A1: Auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel A2: Auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel B1: Auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel B2: Auto
DRAM Timing Control: Auto

1st Information:

CAS# Latency: 5 DRAM Clocks
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay: 5 DRAM Clocks
DRAM RAS# Precharge: 5 DRAM Clocks
DRAM RAS# Activate to Precharge: 15 DRAM Clocks
RAS# to RAS# Delay: Auto
Row Refresh Recycle Time: 55 DRAM Clocks
Write Recovery Time: Auto
Read to Precharge Time: Auto

2nd Information:

Read to Write Delay (S/D): Auto
Write to Read Delay (S): Auto
Write to Read Delay (D): Auto
Read to Read Delay (S): Auto
Read to Read Delay (D): Auto
Write to Write Delay (S): Auto
Write to Write Delay (D): Auto

3rd Information:

Write to PRE Delay: Auto
Read to PRE Delay: Auto
PRE to PRE Delay: Auto
All PRE to ACT Delay: Auto
All PRE to REF Delay: Auto
DRAM Static Read Control: Disabled
DRAM Read Training: Disabled
MEM. OC Charger: Enabled
Ai Clock Twister: Moderate
Ai Transaction Booster: Auto

PCIE Frequency: 100

CPU Voltage: 1.4
CPU PLL Voltage:1.53
FSB Termination Voltage:1.31
DRAM Voltage: Auto
North Bridge Voltage:1.4
South Bridge 1.5 Voltage: Auto
South Bridge 1.1 Voltage: Auto

CPU GTL Reference (0): Auto
CPU GTL Reference (1): Auto
CPU GTL Reference (2): Auto
CPU GTL Reference (3): Auto
NB GTL Reference: Auto
DDR2 ChA Reference Voltage: Auto
DDR2 ChB Reference Voltage: Auto
North Bridge DDR Reference: Auto

CPU Configuration:

Ratio CMOS Setting: 8.5
C1E Support: Enabled
Max CPUID Value Limit: Enabled
Intel Virtualization Tech: Enabled
CPU TM Function: Enabled
Execute Disable Bit: Enabled

Load-Line Calibration: Enabled
CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
PCIE Spread Spectrum: Disabled

Going to water cool the NB next with the swiftech block made for this mobo.

Also like to mention that all superfetch does is "stop responding" anyways... You would have figured that MS woulda/coulda/shoulda fixed that crap by now.....:shakes:

Superfetch is fine, my HDD's dont thrash at all.

Cant get 500x8 stable eh Grn?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furiøùs

Superfetch is fine, my HDD's dont thrash at all.

Cant get 500x8 stable eh Grn?

---

500FSB grrr!!!

I can get it to prime for about 40 mins or so b4 2 cores crap out on me.
I think I need more vcore but dont want to stress this chip to hard as I might be selling it for something bettter.

I'll pm you my settings and findings in few, just gotta finnish something for work..

quick question, im only using 1 video card. If i put my card in the bottom pciEX slot will it run @16x.
Or do I have to use the "normal" slot?
Thanks
Im getting the Asus mobo wednesday. Wish me luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mreld3r

quick question, im only using 1 video card. If i put my card in the bottom pciEX slot will it run @16x.
Or do I have to use the "normal" slot?
Thanks
Im getting the Asus mobo wednesday. Wish me luck.

---

I did this exact same thing for a while, and unfortunately it will only run at x8 in the bottom slot. Personally, I like the way the setup looks with the graphics card in the bottom slot and how it puts more distance between the CPU, memory and NB from the heat producing video card. Not sure why it runs at x8 given the fact that two cards will run both at x8, which tells me it should allow all 16 lanes to run on the bottom slot if it detects nothing in the top slot.

Even though the bottom slot ran at x8 I did not notice any performance gain going to the x16 top slot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

I'll pm you my settings and findings in few, just gotta finnish something for work..

---

Hi
Plz PM Me Too I Need 500FSB I Can 499FSB With 1.65 Volt CPU But Crash System After 20Second
Tanx Man:up:

I am stable 12h+ blend, IBT but I got random reboots just browsing www or watching movies.

I was testing all on basic system - no LAN adapters, no USB devices (and I got a lot of them).

I remember someone had same problem here but I cannot find those posts :).

Any proven methods to solve it? like bump that or that? Here are some pics and settings:

Code:

---

Processor:  q9550 e0 (vid 1.25v)
Ai Overclock Tuner: Manual
OC From CPU Level Up: Auto
Ratio CMOS Setting: 8.5
FSB Frequency: 464
CPU Clock Skew: Normal
NB Clock Skew: Normal
FSB Strap to North Bridge: 333
DRAM Frequency: DDR2-1115MHz

DRAM CLK Skew on Channel A1: auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel A2: auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel B1: auto
DRAM CLK Skew on Channel B2: auto
DRAM Timing Control: Manual

1st Information:

CAS# Latency: 5 DRAM Clocks
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay: 5 DRAM Clocks
DRAM RAS# Precharge: 5 DRAM Clocks
DRAM RAS# Activate to Precharge: 15 DRAM Clocks
RAS# to RAS# Delay:  3
Row Refresh Recycle Time: 55 DRAM Clocks
Write Recovery Time: 6
Read to Precharge Time: 3

2nd Information:

Read to Write Delay (S/D): 8
Write to Read Delay (S): 3
Write to Read Delay (D): 5
Read to Read Delay (S): 4
Read to Read Delay (D): 6
Write to Write Delay (S): 4
Write to Write Delay (D): 6

3rd Information:

Write to PRE Delay: 14
Read to PRE Delay: 5
PRE to PRE Delay: 1
All PRE to ACT Delay: 5
All PRE to REF Delay: 5
DRAM Static Read Control: Enabled
DRAM Read Training: Disabled
MEM. OC Charger: Enabled
Ai Clock Twister: Stronger
Ai Transaction Booster: Manual

Common Performance Level: 8
Pull-in of CHA PH1: Disabled
Pull-in of CHA PH2: Disabled
Pull-in of CHA PH3: Disabled
Pull-in of CHB PH1: Disabled
Pull-in of CHB PH2: Disabled
Pull-in of CHB PH3: Disabled

PCIE Frequency: 102

CPU Voltage: 1.33125
CPU PLL Voltage: 1.53975
FSB Termination Voltage: 1.365
DRAM Voltage: 2.15775
North Bridge Voltage: 1.4445
South Bridge 1.5 Voltage: 1.50
South Bridge 1.1 Voltage: 1.1325

CPU GTL Reference (0): 90
CPU GTL Reference (1): 50
CPU GTL Reference (2): 90
CPU GTL Reference (3): 50
NB GTL Reference: 60
DDR2 ChA Reference Voltage: Auto
DDR2 ChB Reference Voltage: Auto
North Bridge DDR Reference: Auto

CPU Configuration:

Ratio CMOS Setting: 8.5
C1E Support: Disabled
Max CPUID Value Limit: Disabled
Intel Virtualization Tech: Disabled
CPU TM Function: Disabled
Execute Disable Bit: Disabled

Load-Line Calibration: Enabled
CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
PCIE Spread Spectrum: Disabled

---

http://images42.fotosik.pl/45/b84ed029455573d2.jpg

All I can see are the cpu and NB GTL's look way different to what everyone else (and I) seem to be running. May be try tweaking them some more.
Try 40/10/40/10. Post back any results :)

Quote:

---

I am stable 12h+ blend, IBT but I got random reboots just browsing www or watching movies.

---

Sounds familiar, i'd like to hear if you find solution for that.
On my own system, just like yours IBT/LINX/PRIME/HCI MEMTEST stable still random hang ups sometimes. Few notch vCore have always solved this issue but i cant see any mind why Idle state needs more vCore than fully loaded system?

thanks for the info skorpn about the video slots.

I have read this entire thread (took a while) and there doesn't seem to be many q6600's around. Lotta people asking, but not many users. Does the m2f seem to clock the 6600 ok? I notice that most people use the 9550 and the 9650 users have their own thread. What about the 6600 users? is there a good place to read/learn about clocking the 6600?
thanks

I bought an "open box" Asus Maximus II Formula from NewEgg recently.

Only received a bare board, which seemed to have a residue (like drip marks) all over the bottom of the board.

I called NewEgg to complain and also spoke to Asus - they both denied responsibility and Newegg would not replace (only refund).

Anyway, I guessed that it might have been from some type of circuit board cleaner and decided to test it out. I cleaned it up well with rubbinng alcohol and silicone spray (applied with q-tips). It seems to work okay - or did before I sent the faulty ram (Corsair Dominator 1066MHz 2x2Gb CL5) back to NewEgg for replacement. Now I'm waiting for the new ram to arrive before I can test it any further.

I saw another review earlier today via a Google search and a photo of that particular board had the same "drip" marks on the bottom of it.

Did anyone else receive a board that had this mess on the bottom?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mreld3r

thanks for the info skorpn about the video slots.

I have read this entire thread (took a while) and there doesn't seem to be many q6600's around. Lotta people asking, but not many users. Does the m2f seem to clock the 6600 ok? I notice that most people use the 9550 and the 9650 users have their own thread. What about the 6600 users? is there a good place to read/learn about clocking the 6600?
thanks

---

I had my Q6600 on this board running great, before i got my Q9650.
Was running 3.825Ghz on my P5K-Premium and on the MFII, although I was able to run at 4.0Ghz on the MFII with some tweaking pretty easily. Vid for mine was 1.225, L745A. Hope that helps :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveDay72

I bought an "open box" Asus Maximus II Formula from NewEgg recently.

Only received a bare board, which seemed to have a residue (like drip marks) all over the bottom of the board.

I called NewEgg to complain and also spoke to Asus - they both denied responsibility and Newegg would not replace (only refund).

Did anyone else receive a board that had this mess on the bottom?

---

but hey, for $135, there's not much to complain about as long as it works fine.

I just noticed that on post it shows 3.96ghz when 8.5x 464 is 3.944ghz - does your post info is also rounded so badly ppl?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carepolice

Sounds familiar, i'd like to hear if you find solution for that.
On my own system, just like yours IBT/LINX/PRIME/HCI MEMTEST stable still random hang ups sometimes. Few notch vCore have always solved this issue but i cant see any mind why Idle state needs more vCore than fully loaded system?

---

Will play with vcore. Also maybe it is time to try skews :). The biggest issue is that if it passes p95 and linx it will be just waiting for next reboot to be sure that all is ok or not.

Will keep u posted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bito

All I can see are the cpu and NB GTL's look way different to what everyone else (and I) seem to be running. May be try tweaking them some more.
Try 40/10/40/10. Post back any results :)

---

Those GTLs r quite fine tuned this is why they look so strange :) - but I can take a look also at 40/10 why not? whatever helps :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveDay72

I bought an "open box" Asus Maximus II Formula from NewEgg recently.

Only received a bare board, which seemed to have a residue (like drip marks) all over the bottom of the board.

I called NewEgg to complain and also spoke to Asus - they both denied responsibility and Newegg would not replace (only refund).

Anyway, I guessed that it might have been from some type of circuit board cleaner and decided to test it out. I cleaned it up well with rubbinng alcohol and silicone spray (applied with q-tips). It seems to work okay - or did before I sent the faulty ram (Corsair Dominator 1066MHz 2x2Gb CL5) back to NewEgg for replacement. Now I'm waiting for the new ram to arrive before I can test it any further.

I saw another review earlier today via a Google search and a photo of that particular board had the same "drip" marks on the bottom of it.

Did anyone else receive a board that had this mess on the bottom?

---

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=2447

just a quick question. if i upgraded to a rampage extreme, would i get higher fsb and less finicky board (especially with the memory)?

running an e8600 right now, and i'm assuming best GTL setting would be +40mb for core0, and the rest on auto?

Do you think dear members :) that 4 HDDs, DVD Burner, LAN adapter and about 10 USB devices in more or less constant use would require more vSB and if yes which one 1.5 or 1.1 or both :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhiteFireDragon

just a quick question. if i upgraded to a rampage extreme, would i get higher fsb and less finicky board (especially with the memory)?

running an e8600 right now, and i'm assuming best GTL setting would be +40mb for core0, and the rest on auto?

---

As probably you know GTLs are vtt and HW dependent so +40 might work or might not :). Few posts ago I posted calculator which might help you counting values - rest is trail and error.

Have fun.

thanks Seban, i've just linked your calculator into my forum for a quick download :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveDay72

...
Only received a bare board, which seemed to have a residue (like drip marks) all over the bottom of the board.
...
Did anyone else receive a board that had this mess on the bottom?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhiteFireDragon

but hey, for $135, there's not much to complain about as long as it works fine.

---

Yes, it was a great deal for one of these boards, but I was worried that it had suffered some kind of liquid damage, which might only show a fault later on somewhere.

Steve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bito

I had my Q6600 on this board running great, before i got my Q9650.
Was running 3.825Ghz on my P5K-Premium and on the MFII, although I was able to run at 4.0Ghz on the MFII with some tweaking pretty easily. Vid for mine was 1.225, L745A. Hope that helps :)

---

Yea thanks Bito, got any advice "settings" somewhere to start. Right now I'm running a 6600@3.6 ghz on a msi neo2-FR. But it takes a bucket full O' Vcore. Did the same with a e2160 that I had on this mobo. see sig..... I thought it was just a bad chip; but now my 6600 does the same thing. I can clock my mem. really good on this board and even push the fsb way up there; but with all this Vcore, its hotter than a Prescott. The board is an old revision 1 neo-2. I have an asus mfII coming mid-week and any help would be appreciated.
thanks

1901 has successfully brought back the multiplier stuck bug again!!

I'm extatic!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rocks

1901 has successfully brought back the multiplier stuck bug again!!

I'm extatic!

---

LOL that is really funny how serious they are bout their job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KURTZ

thanks Seban, i've just linked your calculator into my forum for a quick download :p

---

You are welcome m8.

hi, im new here...anyone with qx9770 and maximus ii formula? id like to check the OC results... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmilo

hi, im new here...anyone with qx9770 and maximus ii formula? id like to check the OC results... :)

---

Do not get me wrong but if you want to check your OC why not post it?

Probably most of us would be interested to see it no matter if we have CPU like yours or not :).

Cheers

Guys

I'm having this problem that drivin' me insane...

I've been testing for 3 weeks IBT, i achieved 3 nice OC

4005 (445x9) on 1,3 vcore set / vcore idle 1,288
4050 (450x9) on 1,325 vcore / vcore idle 1,316
4140 (455x9) on 1,3625 vcore set / vcore idle 1,358

I passed all them on IBT...then the other day won't pass again, re tweak GTLS and some things and pass again, then the same...

I have a TT 850W Toughpower PSU, and a 8800 ULTRA vmoded but runing stock 612/1512/1080 for now, 2 seagates Raid 0, 1 Sata Optical drive, the 4 Antec 900 fans, 3 Sanyo Denki San Ace, the pump and the Rehobus Controller...
As summer is here temp in my room goes to 28C - 30C, today i noticed that the card was artifcating in windows vista desktop if i run same settings as i was playing for months when ambient where 24C - 25C...This started after doint the IBT test last night, but i was on Air Conditioner with 24C - 25C ambient, so i'm lost here...

Even at those 28C - 30C i have good temps for 24/7, NB and SB never pass 43C, PWM 40C, CORES are fine < 35C, GPU is 44C idle

I'm starting to put a doubt on my PSU

I also swapped RAM, now i have the Gskills PC29600 and problem is the same

Any help I appreciatte very much

Sergio

No Multi issue on this bios for me.

All the way from 6 to 10 in 1/2's.

Totally rest cmos after flashing bios and do not reload your stored profiles, re add them manual and save over old ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by humeyboy

No Multi issue on this bios for me.

All the way from 6 to 10 in 1/2's.

Totally rest cmos after flashing bios and do not reload your stored profiles, re add them manual and save over old ones.

---

Same here , have 1802 loaded on bios1 and 1901 loaded on bios2

While 1901 offers nothing I find it quite stable and I have NO multi issues, phase pull-ins are STILL NOT WORKING!
But seeing as they never had it was to be expected.

1901 Bios is total :banana::banana::banana::banana:. It reduced my memory read up to 500 mbps

there is more to testing a bios besides running an Everest bench.
tref value is the same so bandwidth should be the same, the bios is far from :banana::banana::banana::banana:

Awaiting test results :)
Especially as it mentions increasing memory compatibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

there is more to testing a bios besides running an Everest bench.
tref value is the same so bandwidth should be the same, the bios is far from :banana::banana::banana::banana:

---

I agree. I am on bios 1901, and so far, loving it.
I am trying a more extreme 24/7 overclock, but for that, I will need to leave vNB at 1.45v. You think it is safe for 24/7? Temps are not a problem, since I seen to have an insane good mobo, that will never ever pass 39C NB during prime... It stays on 29C-30C idle. And it is aircooled. Do you guys think it is safe to go for 1.45v NB 24/7, if temps will never pass, lets say 42C under prime at that volt?

Here some pics of my system...

http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/6536/full3mj8.jpg
http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/987/full4is8.jpg
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2604/temps1gi4.jpg

[]'s
Simps

HAHA Two 38mm Deltas for push/pull on the Ultra120. Thats awesome! :up: :up:
I run one of the pull side, 25mm on the push and I thought that was nuts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeyakame

HAHA Two 38mm Deltas for push/pull on the Ultra120. Thats awesome! :up: :up:
I run one of the pull side, 25mm on the push and I thought that was nuts.

---

HEHEH!
But those are no deltas... Those are 80-85CMF 38mm Panaflo's @ 30-32dB... And those are the loudest fans I have... Others are all <28dB's, so the system is actually quite, since I use it with closed doors, and it stays inside a cabinet I have...

What about the 1.45vNB for 24/7... You guys think it is safe?

If you can keep the board stable and temps manageable then why not. Do you need that much for starters, I've never needed more than 1.36v Vnb on a P45 and that was with over 470fsb, q6600 and 2gb ram sticks.

Ahh that would explain it! The 38mm Delta i'm using is a ~130cfm 2800rpm unit, got a 210cfm 3700rpm 38mm as well but it sounds like an aircraft taking off its so loud, so it just sits in a box.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simps

I agree. I am on bios 1901, and so far, loving it.
Simps

---

hehe nice pics mate, the mobo should be freezing :D

Why you love bios 1901, what diff did you find ?

Cheers
Sergio

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeyakame

If you can keep the board stable and temps manageable then why not. Do you need that much for starters, I've never needed more than 1.36v Vnb on a P45 and that was with over 470fsb, q6600 and 2gb ram sticks.

Ahh that would explain it! The 38mm Delta i'm using is a ~130cfm 2800rpm unit, got a 210cfm 3700rpm 38mm as well but it sounds like an aircraft taking off its so loud, so it just sits in a box.

---

I am going for a 65nm quad at 7x500 (3.5GHz) and DDR2-1200 CL5 PL8.
I am doing some tests at that speed, and I need 1.45vNB... I am a bit worried about using 1.45vNB 24/7, but I guess since temps are ok, I will give it a try....

OMG man, those 220CMF 38mm deltas are insane! I believe they are 65dB... But they are really nice for short benchs... Thanks for your repply...

Edit: I just found a youtube link of those deltas's 220CMF... They are 4600RPM. That is really insane! I don't think these are the ones you have... You probably have a quiter one... This one is just insane LOL!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmDGPFLoPwc

Now, these is the loudest computer fan ever tested... Thats 350CMF 80dB+, and can kill your ears :/
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws385t...eature=related

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andressergio

hehe nice pics mate, the mobo should be freezing :D

Why you love bios 1901, what diff did you find ?

Cheers
Sergio

---

So far, I find it more stable at 500FSB on my 65nm quad. I used 1307 before. It is stable actually, I just think I can drop some Vcore and Vdimm, before I call it done. The only voltage I can't drop anymore, is vNB, witch I will have to leave at 1.45v :(

[]'s
Simps

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simps

I am going for a 65nm quad at 7x500 (3.5GHz) and DDR2-1200 CL5 PL8.
I am doing some tests at that speed, and I need 1.45vNB... I am a bit worried about using 1.45vNB 24/7, but I guess since temps are ok, I will give it a try....

OMG man, those 220CMF 38mm deltas are insane! I believe they are 65dB... But they are really nice for short benchs... Thanks for your repply...

Edit: I just found a youtube link of those deltas's 220CMF... They are 4600RPM. That is really insane! I don't think these are the ones you have... You probably have a quiter one... This one is just insane LOL!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmDGPFLoPwc

Now, these is the loudest computer fan ever tested... Thats 350CMF 80dB+, and can kill your ears :/
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws385t...eature=related






So far, I find it more stable at 500FSB on my 65nm quad. I used 1307 before. It is stable actually, I just think I can drop some Vcore and Vdimm, before I call it done. The only voltage I can't drop anymore, is vNB, witch I will have to leave at 1.45v :(

[]'s
Simps

---

Try messing with cpu and nb clock skews, and see if they help any.
I gave up trying to get a P45 to 500 on a quad at about 1.40v Vnb so maybe you do need it after all. What Performance Level are you trying to use?
I use PL7 12:10 on an X48 and need 1.49v Vnb for 481fsb, so maybe your ball park isn't too far after all since i need at least 1.65v for tighter performance level at this point.

I am running 7x500 = 3.5GHz, DDR2-1200 5-5-5-15 (rest on auto), PL8, stronger. Gives about 10500 MB/s and 49 latency on everest. 1.43vcore on my 65nm quad, 1.38VTT, 2.1 Vdimm, 1.59PLL and 1.45vNB. IBT 20 loops and prime blend 8h stable. But i am still on intense testing, trying to drop vcore and vdimm.

Don't know if you'll get Vcc much lower than that but you can sure try I guess, 1.43v is pretty good for 3.5ghz, and just remember a little extra voltage will be necessary at such high FSB to ensure both dies are kept stable under load! 12:10 the divider you are using is the most stable I've found with quads.

Nice latency by the way :D Impressive for a P45 as they don't usually take much fancy to latencies in the low 50s let alone high 40s!

Yeah... This is what I am getting for my 24/7 settings.

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/2472/mf2qqn8.jpg

Still a bit worried about keeping 1.45vNB for 24/7...
Anyone here is running 1.45vNB for 24/7?

I do 1.448 24/7 So far so good and I have no objections getting it higher if it will be needed (also Grnfinger is quite high on vNB) - but vNB is a not a big deal. ppl use up to 1.55 :) and they are fine.

Little Update on my random reboots - either CPU or NB clock skews (I set them to 100) did the job.

No more boots. I will test which option exactly but I can bet it is NB Skew as my MOBO is badly warped in NB area (I still wonder if my NB has any contact at all with HS ;) ).

So in next few days when I got more time I will try hitting higher FSBs and will see how far SKEW train will take me.

Cheers

EDIT: Your vNB temps are nice - I can see all those fans - but can you chack what rev u got of NB? Maybe A3 finally?

@ Seban: i'm wondering if exists a method to calculate the skews like the gtls ... can you give me a tip or something?

KURTZ,

Get $50-100K USD together and get yourself a logic analyzer ;)

Thats the method of calculating skews. We just guess them throughn trial and error.

i just plugged in my e7300 for a 4ghz quick run and tested it on orthos. after i tested in orthos, core 1 fails after just 1 sec at 1.35v. i bumped up the vcore all the way up to 1.45v just so it passes the stress test for sure but to my surprise, core 1 still fails after only 1 sec. this means i have some other settings wrong. what should i set the vnb, vtt, GTL, and memory divider to be? here is my current settings:

Code:

---

Processor:  e7300
Ai Overclock Tuner: Manual
Ratio CMOS Setting: 10
FSB Frequency: 400
CPU Clock Skew: Auto
NB Clock Skew: Auto
FSB Strap to North Bridge:  266 MHz
DRAM Frequency: 1003 MHz

DRAM Timing Control: Manual
1st Information: 5-5-5-15

DRAM Static Read Control: Disabled
DRAM Read Training: Disabled
MEM. OC Charger: Enabled
Ai Clock Twister: Auto
Ai Transaction Booster: Auto

PCIE Frequency: 101

CPU Voltage: 1.3750
CPU PLL Voltage: 1.53975
FSB Termination Voltage: 1.35175
DRAM Voltage: 2.01200
North Bridge Voltage:  1.35175
South Bridge 1.5 Voltage:  1.50000
South Bridge 1.1 Voltage: 1.10000:

CPU GTL Reference (0): +30mV
CPU GTL Reference (1): Auto
CPU GTL Reference (2): +30
CPU GTL Reference (3): Auto
NB GTL Reference:  Auto
DDR2 ChA Reference Voltage: Auto
DDR2 ChB Reference Voltage: Auto
North Bridge DDR Reference: Auto

Load-Line Calibration: Enabled
CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
PCIE Spread Spectrum: Disabled

---

Guys

Any working link for bios 1901 ?

Sergio

http://rapidshare.com/files/18089848...-1901.rar.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawdaw

http://rapidshare.com/files/18089848...-1901.rar.html

---

thanks mate :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simps

I agree. I am on bios 1901, and so far, loving it.
I am trying a more extreme 24/7 overclock, but for that, I will need to leave vNB at 1.45v. You think it is safe for 24/7? Temps are not a problem, since I seen to have an insane good mobo, that will never ever pass 39C NB during prime... It stays on 29C-30C idle. And it is aircooled. Do you guys think it is safe to go for 1.45v NB 24/7, if temps will never pass, lets say 42C under prime at that volt?

Here some pics of my system...

http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/987/full4is8.jpg
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2604/temps1gi4.jpg

[]'s
Simps

---

That is not a computer, it is a HoverCraft. :ROTF: :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KURTZ

@ Seban: i'm wondering if exists a method to calculate the skews like the gtls ... can you give me a tip or something?

---

Just like mikey said there is no real calculation to be done the method is set and pray ;).

In my case because rest was already tuned and almost stable It was enough to bump Skews to first non default option - 100 (still have to test which in fact gave me stability).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhiteFireDragon

i just plugged in my e7300 for a 4ghz quick run and tested it on orthos. after i tested in orthos, core 1 fails after just 1 sec at 1.35v. i bumped up the vcore all the way up to 1.45v just so it passes the stress test for sure but to my surprise, core 1 still fails after only 1 sec. this means i have some other settings wrong. what should i set the vnb, vtt, GTL, and memory divider to be? here is my current settings:

---

Is your ram stable?

You could try strap 333 to NB as it works nicely for most of us.

Also run small ftt to be sure that you CPU can handle your OC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhiteFireDragon

i just plugged in my e7300 for a 4ghz quick run and tested it on orthos. after i tested in orthos, core 1 fails after just 1 sec at 1.35v. i bumped up the vcore all the way up to 1.45v just so it passes the stress test for sure but to my surprise, core 1 still fails after only 1 sec. this means i have some other settings wrong. what should i set the vnb, vtt, GTL, and memory divider to be? here is my current settings:

---

266 strap is a tad stressfull on the MCH.
You could try upping the NB but I think your looking at GTL adjustment.
CPU Clock Skew could help, you could try delay 100 and see if it improves

but i don't understand one thing: if i put -100 delay the skews what i can improve? can i put my vNB lower? vDIMM maybe? what helps this skew?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KURTZ

but i don't understand one thing: if i put -100 delay the skews what i can improve? can i put my vNB lower? vDIMM maybe? what helps this skew?

---

They improve stabillity at the same vcore/vnb/vdimm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KURTZ

but i don't understand one thing: if i put -100 delay the skews what i can improve? can i put my vNB lower? vDIMM maybe? what helps this skew?

---

Tracks/traces on motherboard which transport informations between buses can have different lengths (and they do - of course differences in lenghts are absolutely minimal - the only exception might by DRAMM slots).

When working on nominal clocks MB projects include those differences, corrections are in printed in BIOS and some tolerance is also included. When you OC you push this included tolerance threshold to limits and this is why u need to adjust it yourself.

On motherboard there are data lines and parallel to them control data lines for this data. Both have minimal differences in length, when you over clock you change the rate at which they travel (you can say you speed them up - although technical you do not, because they already travel at almost constant close to speed of light :)) and this is where mismatch can occur - when data pack traveling by one line can reach target (i.e CPU or NB or Mem Stick) faster/slower then control packet for it which traveling by parallel line then errors will occur.

So you add delay, delay sending data by one from pair of parallel line by lets say 100ps which is 0.0000000001 of the second and it helps get all the packets on time to their targets so there are no errors hence lets hope we are stable.

And coming back to question in theory It should not impact positively your volts but who knows? Tho i would not say so :).

So if you are happy with you OC and you do not have problems you probably should not touch it because there is no point of doing so.

But, if as I did, you face some problems or you cant go any higher with OC then Skews might help you.

thx mate :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KURTZ

thx mate :)

---

You are welcome m8.

Well there of course might be other reason then instability or limited OC to play with Skews - performance.

Soon I will be testing which skew gave me stability so I will also test at same time if SKEWS has any impact on performance, but I would be very surprised if they would.

Cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seban

Tracks/traces on motherboard which transport informations between buses can have different lengths (and they do - of course differences in lenghts are absolutely minimal - the only exception might by DRAMM slots).

When working on nominal clocks MB projects include those differences, corrections are in printed in BIOS and some tolerance is also included. When you OC you push this included tolerance threshold to limits and this is why u need to adjust it yourself.

On motherboard there are data lines and parallel to them control data lines for this data. Both have minimal differences in length, when you over clock you change the rate at which they travel (you can say you speed them up - although technical you do not, because they already travel at almost constant close to speed of light :)) and this is where mismatch can occur - when data pack traveling by one line can reach target (i.e CPU or NB or Mem Stick) faster/slower then control packet for it which traveling by parallel line then errors will occur.

So you add delay, delay sending data by one from pair of parallel line by lets say 100ps which is 0.0000000001 of the second and it helps get all the packets on time to their targets so there are no errors hence lets hope we are stable.

And coming back to question in theory It should not impact positively your volts but who knows? Tho i would not say so :).

So if you are happy with you OC and you do not have problems you probably should not touch it because there is no point of doing so.

But, if as I did, you face some problems or you cant go any higher with OC then Skews might help you.

---

Thanks alot for the info !!! :up::up::up:
With your SKEW settings I managet do get 8*450 from my Q9450 under 1.2vcore On Auto settings I needed 1.25-1.27 vcore for this FSB :clap:.
Thanks again !

With my CPU, a friend of mine managed to get 8*500 ot P5Q-Deluxe, wich is almost the same like my MIIF, but for me is impossible :( Any advices how to tweak the mobo with the system in my signature ?
Here some shots 8*500@1.36 vcore:
http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/3029/3dmv4850yx1.jpg
http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/5595/snm4000hz3.jpg

And some shots on 8*490@1.296 vcore:
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/2938/q8fa4.jpg

So the CPU can a lot, but I still can't make it stable :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seban

You are welcome m8.

Well there of course might be other reason then instability or limited OC to play with Skews - performance.

Soon I will be testing which skew gave me stability so I will also test at same time if SKEWS has any impact on performance, but I would be very surprised if they would.

Cheers

---

Would be a nice test... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeBar

Would be a nice test... :)

---

Weekend is almost here stay tuned :)

Damn this thread is almost dying... All this core i7 threads getting in the way =/ This was / is a very good mobo, I hope you guys keep feeding the thread!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simps

Damn this thread is almost dying... All this core i7 threads getting in the way =/ This was / is a very good mobo, I hope you guys keep feeding the thread!

---

TBH if new Bioses will not introduce working Pull-ins then most of things are covered here.

But I would also be happy to keep it alive.

What exactly does pull-ins do? It wasn't in the manual or anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoehorned

What exactly does pull-ins do? It wasn't in the manual or anything.

---

Increases bandwidth / reduces PL Level

What are some Memory Bios options to get some speed up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gunnz Akimbo

What are some Memory Bios options to get some speed up?

---

Static read control = enabled
Dram read training = enabled
Ai Clock Twister = strong or stronger
Use the lowest performance level you can

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CryptiK

Static read control = enabled
Dram read training = enabled
Ai Clock Twister = strong or stronger
Use the lowest performance level you can

---

Which ones are more important? I noticed that when setting the Ai Clock Twister on strong or stronger, the PL level needs to be higher, otherwise there's instability or can't boot into windows.

In that case you need to increase the vNB to make it stable.

Static read control and dram read training give a nice bandwidth boost, and AI Clock Twister gives a small bandwidth increase but reduces latency.

Performance level is by far the most influential on bandwidth. Set the lowest possible PL, then set the others to whatever you can, increasing vNB to reasonable level to aid stability.

What is considered reasonable? I've had vnb up to 1.50v for 2x1gb sticks, PL 8, and fsb 500.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoehorned

What is considered reasonable? I've had vnb up to 1.50v for 2x1gb sticks, PL 8, and fsb 500.

---

Dont know your exact specs but 1.50V vNB is pretty high already, just for 2x1gb sticks.

Wich ratio you have ? fsb:ram !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoehorned

What is considered reasonable? I've had vnb up to 1.50v for 2x1gb sticks, PL 8, and fsb 500.

---

Around 1.30 - 1.45v is all you should need. Even with a quad and 2 x 2GB sticks, PL8 and around 430 - 475 FSB.

That said though, I thought I was rock stable, but i can't get crysis stable at 4GHz. It's intel burn test stable, 13 hours orthos stable, windows memtest stable, dual SPI32M stable, but it cant last more than 10 minutes in crysis in the heavy scenes, sometimes as little as 30 seconds, before crashing to desktop.

It's definitely not my video card causing the instability. I dropped the system to 3.8GHz (423 x 9) and used the ram at the same speed/timings/voltage as normal, and left the card at the usual speed and voltage, and it was totally stable for 2 hours of gaming.

Increasing the SB 1.1v to 1.2v helped a little, but didnt solve it, I've tried up to 1.3v to no avail, and SB 1.5v makes no diff no matter what I set. Increasing vNB to 1.45v (way overkill for my FSB/ram timings) and it made no difference. Ive tried CPU & NB clock skews between 100 and 300ps, and all ram skew combos to no avail. I've dropped AI Clock Twister to moderate in conjunction with raising vNB and it didn't help either. i tried PL10 (usually run PL8) and it made no difference.

It's actually more stable at 534 FSB and 7.5x MP than at 445 FSB and 9x MP. This is a really odd issue. I'll report back if I can get it sorted, and running a lower cpu speed/FSB is not an option for me, I'll change mobos before I do that. I have a few more things to experiment with, but I've pretty much exhausted all my options.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CryptiK

Around 1.30 - 1.45v is all you should need. Even with a quad and 2 x 2GB sticks, PL8 and around 430 - 475 FSB.

That said though, I thought I was rock stable, but i can't get crysis stable at 4GHz. It's intel burn test stable, 13 hours orthos stable, windows memtest stable, dual SPI32M stable, but it cant last more than 10 minutes in crysis in the heavy scenes, sometimes as little as 30 seconds, before crashing to desktop.

It's definitely not my video card causing the instability. I dropped the system to 3.8GHz (423 x 9) and used the ram at the same speed/timings/voltage as normal, and left the card at the usual speed and voltage, and it was totally stable for 2 hours of gaming.

Increasing the SB 1.1v to 1.2v helped a little, but didnt solve it, I've tried up to 1.3v to no avail, and SB 1.5v makes no diff no matter what I set. Increasing vNB to 1.45v (way overkill for my FSB/ram timings) and it made no difference. Ive tried CPU & NB clock skews between 100 and 300ps, and all ram skew combos to no avail. I've dropped AI Clock Twister to moderate in conjunction with raising vNB and it didn't help either. i tried PL10 (usually run PL8) and it made no difference.

It's actually more stable at 534 FSB and 7.5x MP than at 445 FSB and 9x MP. This is a really odd issue. I'll report back if I can get it sorted, and running a lower cpu speed/FSB is not an option for me, I'll change mobos before I do that. I have a few more things to experiment with, but I've pretty much exhausted all my options.

---

Have you tried setting PCIE to 101, 102 or 103?
I had some major issues with Far Cry2 at 100 and 101. Setting PCIe to 103 resolved my gaming instability.
Something to try if you havent yet.
You could always come to the red side:D The grass isnt always greener on the other side:rofl:

Yeah I have tried all bootable PCI-E freq's and makes no difference. Frustrated, I got crazy and set NB GTL Ref to -100mv and to my abject amazement so far its been stable for an hour in crysis at 4GHz and all my normal settings for everything else. It's very strange as my board seemed to really dislike any NB GTL Ref setting other than auto (it still gets very unstable with any positive NB GTL Refs), but I thought what have I got to lose by trying again. I will have to test other things like IBT and Orthos to see how it behaves.

There is a nice tut from Tony over at OCZ that explains in simple terms CPU Clock Skew and NB Clock Skew, how they work and how/when to adjust.

This from there site

Intel FSB Over Clocking, clock skew and the effects it has on system memory.

This applies to all P35, P43/P45, X38 and X48 based Intel motherboards.


Front side bus has been with us for a few years now, we have all become used to talking “what FSB speed” etc and some bios writers have even chosen to use the FSB string in bios for AMD CPU's as they feel more people understand what FSB does over Hyper transport Bus or HTT. The fact is FSB has limits, especially when the clocks on a motherboard are not as accurate or “clean” as they should be.

Many of the new enthusiast level mother boards now feature some level of user tweakable skew, I actually feel in opening up these options many of the bios/board level tuning engineers have got a little lazy and just left end users to set what used to be programmed in the background.

So what skews do we have access too and how do they work?

On a typical enthusiast level board we may see the following:

1 NB clock skew
2 CPU clock skew
3 Dram clock skew
4 Dram command skew

Working from 1 thru 4 let us have a look what each of these do.

1 NB clock skew and 2 CPU clock skew.

As the CPU has a clock so does the Northbridge, with high speed DDR2 and now even higher speed DDR3 this clock has risen to higher and higher levels, the main issue is the clock that drives the NB as these insane speeds suffers from jitter as the frequency rises. One way round this is to use high specification clocks with high specification power supplies that feed them, the issues with this at the motherboard level are cost and real estate.

On most motherboards NB skew can ONLY be delayed, usually is 100ps steps. Now you would feel that adjusting this clock would be in relation to the CPU clock, the fast is though it seems to follow this rule but not follow it at the same time. In theory you should only have to adjust either the NB skew or the CPU clock skew to bring them into alignment, thru hands on testing both have been found to work well when used together. Using Intel's new dual core processors such as the E8500 CPU most boards seem to respond best to between 300 and 500ps delay skew on the CPU clock from around 1600FSB(400) upwards. What seems to happen is the clock advances as you program an increase in FSB speed, so the clock looks to “drift” so you have to dial it back.
NB clock skew from testing does NOT look to need as much, I have found 100 thru 300ps skew adjust usually can help although it is NOT always needed, it looks to depend on the NB memory controller load. So if you are just running 2x1GB dimms you probably do not need to worry about NB clock skew as much but running 8GB of memory may force you to dial in some adjustment.



3 Dram clock skew.

Most modern desktop enthusiast level motherboards have 4 dimm slots, we “hope” the motherboard designer has calculated all traces from the memory controller to these dimm slots to be exactly the same, the reality is though in most cases they are not. What this means to over clockers is the clock signal arriving at the dimm slots may be different to each dimm just by a few ps. So the purpose of Dram clock skew it to try and re align these clocks across all 4 dimm slots so that they all hit the memory at exactly the same moment.

Here is a quote from Lostcircuits.com where my good friend Michael Schuette has been educating people for many years.

“In a dual channel memory system all data have to arrive at the receiver (memory controller) at the same time. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to adjust the clock skew of the data strobe to take into account the different trace lengths between the memory controller and the corresponding memory slots. Older designs have largely employed snaking of the memory data traces, however, an easier way of getting there is to adjust the data strobes with a differential delay for the two channels. This explains the different timing values for the two memory channels with, for example, the clock skew of channel A being advanced 150 psec further than that of channel B. The physical trace length is different for the two channels and, therefore, the clock skew needs to be adjusted accordingly to compensate. “


http://www.lostcircuits.com/advice/bios3/8.shtml

Now what is frustrating for most of us is we have nothing that shows us a “start point”, modern motherboards do feature a system that “looks” to see where the clock signal should be (DQS Training) so skew at AUTO should be close, the reality though is high speed and high load can push this AUTO feature quite a way out from being close so you may be forced to adopt a “lets see if this works” methodology to your testing unless you happen to have 4 input high speed scopes at your disposal which means you can see the clocks etc and just dial them in. Also bios engineers can hide skew settings behind the AUTO setting which they feel work well, the issue here though is different memory IC brands, batches or die revisions coupled with different PCB have a massive effect on what skew works and where it needs to be, so fine tuning a board for 1 specific brand or type of memory is VERY bad.

What you are faced with is the need to adjust settings end users really should not have to change, it is an ugly situation but noise, jitter, poor component quality, high speed and in some cases a little laziness have forced this upon us.

4 Dram command skew

First we need to understand how Dram Command works:

We all know Command or CPC (command per clock) as 1T or 2T, for Intel systems this is actually 1N and 2N. A command signal is given by the memory controller when it first attempts to access system memory. Basically if you have 1T set the memory controller will try to latch onto a memory bank, the name for this is Chip Select as this is exactly what it is trying to do in 1T clock cycle. Once it has latched it looks for Columns and Rows, we know them as CAS and RAS. CAS or column address strobe and RAS or row address strobe can either take 1 clock / 2 clocks or in some cases 3 clock (3T)

So adding Command skew into the mix means we can advance or delay the memory controllers attempt for that first access to a bank of memory in relation to the data clock. This means we should be able to dial in 1T (1N) performance at higher clocks or with an increased memory load. Using 1T (1N) is usually very dependent on the amount of banks and whether they are single rank or double rank. 4 banks but single rank means 4 modules that are single sided, 4 banks double rank means 4 modules double sided. 1T (1N) works best with single rank modules and easiest of all with just 2 banks (2 modules installed), having Command skew though may allow us to dial in 1T(1N) where it usually will not run, this option however really is for those seeking the absolute max from their systems and being honest most end users would do better sticking with 2T (2N command) and leaving this skew option by AUTO.

Now we need to look at the Front Side Bus its self (keeping it simple)


FSB is Intel's proprietary name for the bus architecture it uses on its current processors. This bus speed is calculated using a bus multiplier and bus frequency. In the case of most processors such as the dual core E8500 or quad core Q9650 this is given using a Front Side Bus of 1333MHZ which is quad pumped so we need to divide by 4 and a bus multiplier which is 9.5 for the E8500 and 9 for the Q9650.

1333MHZ/4=333
333x9.5=3163MHZ E8500 base speed

1333MHZ/4=333

333x9=2997MHZ Q9650 base speed.

Using the available ratio's Intel has built into its memory controller we can adjust the dram speed to either run synchronously with the CPU FSB ( most efficient way) or asynchronously which adds a little extra latency.

There are in fact 2 synchronous options for the memory bus, these are 1:1 and 1:2.

Option 1
1:1 would mean a CPU with a FSB of 1333MHZ would have dram running 333MHZ(single pump clock) X 2 for double data rate which means 667MHZ or PC 5400

Option2
1:2 with the same 1333FSB would mean a base clock of 333MHZ(single pumped clock) x2 for 667 resulting in a dram clock of 667x2 which is 1333MHZ.

Option 1 is normal on DDR2 systems, with Option 2 being available on DDR3 systems. Option 1 is actually available to DDR3 also hence why there are 2 ways to run synchronous.

There are other options for Dram ratio, these usually are all down clocks or up clocks for the dram speed with reference to the single pumped FSB speed. Its important to know that any move away from synchronous clocks will add latency and in such be slightly slower than running synchronously. It is not always best to run very high memory speeds on an Intel system, the architecture for FSB means data has to travel from one domain to another thru the memory controller. This is where tRD or the read delay comes into play (performance level)

Keeping things very simple the memory controller has rules. These rules involve the following.

1 CAS latency on the memory
2 front side bus Strapping in relation to the Northbridge
3 the memory ratio(divider) used
4 the tRD (read delay) you are trying to run.

In the case of DDR3, to physically run a 2000MHZ module at 2000MHZ you have to run 2000FSB. This means a bus speed (single pumped) of 500 set in bios. Now this is a huge overclock for quite a few components.

1 Clock generator
2 Northbridge
3 CPU
4 Memory.

Even a 1600MHZ module will require 1600FSB which for most mainstream processors means over clocking. So again you have the following items running out of spec.

1 Clock generator
2 Northbridge
3 CPU
4 Memory

As mentioned earlier the higher the bus frequency the board is running the more chance you have of jitter or clock misalignment. DDR2 from around 1000MHZ suffers from clock issues on the boards, DDR3 is the same. From around 1200MHZ DDR3 usually needs some tweak to have it working cleanly. For end users this means the following:

1 The higher the memory speed is, the more chance you have of needing to adjust skew
2 The more memory load( number and size of modules) you have the more chance of needing to adjust skew
3 The higher the CPU bus speed, the more chance you will need to adjust CPU clock skew and dram skews to being things back into alignment.

TRD read delay/performance level has a huge effect on how easy a board will run also. It is most important you dial in the exact delay that is needed for the FSB and CAS latency you are running. It is possible to force the memory controller to run with a tighter tRD, this usually involves over voltage of the NB chipset but again this is for end users who are looking to squeeze every last drop of speed from their systems. Motherboard bios engineers usually have dialed in algorithms that set the correct tRD Vs CAS latency selected and the FSB set in bios Vs the memory ratio used. However they do sometimes get it wrong, so be prepared to have to fine tune.

A good article explaining tRD can be found here: http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3208&p=5
FSB scaling, how to make it run higher.

Explaining FSB can be a little difficult, I usually like to compare the bus to a cloths line with towels hanging on it on a windy day. The reason for this is as follows.

The CPU, (if a quad core 2 cpu's) are hung on the FSB Just like 1or 2 towels, the NB chipset is also hung on the FSB just like another towel on the cloths line. As the FSB frequency rises liken it to the wind speed getting stronger...the towels have a hard time staying on the line and can get blown off, in our case the limits of FSB are reached and components fail on the bus or just fall off.

So how do we increase resistance to FSB issues as the frequency rises?

In bios we have a few tools that help. These are:

VTT or FSB voltage
GTL voltages both CPU and NB
NB voltage
CPU Vcore

Im not going to explain how these work, its best I link you to some awesome articles that show you their effect. I just need to explain here than you need to make sure you have all items on the FSB as stable as they can physically can be. For you to stand a chance of getting memory running stable on your system FSB stability is critical.

Here are some articles to read:

http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=87
http://www.edgeofstability.com/artic.../gtl/gtl1.html

Now for the less technical amongst you I will break it down into a few brief points you need to know.

1 quad cores do not clock as high on the FSB as dual core CPU's do. The reason for this is an Intel quad is actually 2 cpu's in 1 package, and they have issues staying synced on the FSB

2 The NB reacts just like a CPU does on the FSB, its important that you dial in GTL+ voltages as accurately as you do on the CPU to have it clocking on the FSB well.

3 Clock Jitter has a profound effect on the FSB, cheap boards have cheap clocks, cheap clocks usually mean more Jitter which equal lower FSB overclocking.

4 Always dial in GTL before you adjust VTT (fsb voltage) in many cases an increase in VTT is not needed.

Usual GTL values for dual core and high FSB are (45nm cpus)

0.63%
0.63% for each core
0.61% for the Northbridge
For quad cores as I have used down as low as 0.61% for GTL, it all depends on what VTT is set and what the processor needs. Usually though 0.61% is good for the Northbridge with all CPU's.

Try to keep VTT no higher than 1.3V with 45nm CPU's, more may kill them. Remember GTL % values are based on that % of VTT voltage applied. Some boards have values that may justy have numeric values, 0 to 255 etc, for these boards you must research the common used values and cross reference them against the %Value given to VTT.
Overall staying between 67% and 60% is wise for all 65 and 45nb cpu's

:rolleyes:

Nice find Grnfinger. :clap: :clap:

Heres the link


http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/fo...ad.php?t=40747

Yeah I have read that guide before when I was new to P45's, it's a good write up.

Im thinking about trying the new bios (1901 or 1902 or something i believe)

Anyone using it and notice a difference at all? Im trying to get 500x8 stable and wondering if it'll do it for me

1901 offers nothing more than 1802 unfortunately
Its a stable bios but zero improvment

Nevermind then.. :(

Still cant get 500x8 stable btw Grn. i had sent you another PM, not sure if you got it :P