What were the two settings you found to provide more stability?
Printable View
What were the two settings you found to provide more stability?
Were they the DDR references? I'm intruiged too, I'm still hovering around 489x9 so I'm definitely interested :)
CPU Skew = 100ps and NB Skew = Normal, nothing else will even run as long if it even posts as these settings as I have tried many times before.
I'm messing with Simp's GTL theory but not sure if its 100% accurate as it seems back to front as the 1 and 3 should be the higher number on our Quads not 0 and 2 and I'm just as stable settings them to CPU 40/40/40/40 - NB 40 or if higher FSB CPU 50/50/50/50 - NB 50.
I am 100% stable at 495% but ain't happy its 1.45v NB and 1.45V VTT (ain't sure if VTT can be lowered but NB cannot), because this does not give me much headroom for a nice 24/7 500FSB if I can reach it.
What NB strap are you running? 333mhz? Thanks for the info :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by humeyboy
Yes 333 + 1:1 + Moderate + 10 , for some reason its always more stable then 400 for me.
Yeah, I've noticed the same thing, 333mhz seems to be the most stable setting. Everybody seems to be running with atleast a 100ps difference in NB and CPU skews, but if I don't run the skews at the same delay, I won't POST most of the time, and if it does, it instantly freezes while loading windows. A bit strange. Seems like we really need 50ps, 100ps, 150ps, etc settings for fine tuning. The gigabyte P45 series has it, I'm fairly certain it has atleast _something_ to do with people getting better results with quads on that board.Quote:
Originally Posted by humeyboy
If wonder how hard it would be to mod the bios to allow for setting the skews with 50ps increments. Maybe it isn't even possible at all, due to the hardware, I'm not sure.
I would guess the Skews are built into the Chipset's so its only the Bios that lack the increments.
I tried lots of variables but 200 (tried them all) + Normal (tried them all) is not stable at this high FSB so wonder if 50 + Normal would be better.
I was wondering pretty much the same thing. The skews have such a drastic effect it would make sense to implement it if possible. I'm gonna drop a post in the ROG thread, maybe someone could listen there....
Ok, here's something to mess with ya heads...
9x435 = CRASH DEATH SHUTDOWN BLUUAGAGARGHH!!!
8x488 = Prime Prime Prime!!!
Apparently either my CPU has stopped playing games or this board has a issue with slow FSB and high clock speed...lol
I'll get some screenies once I get a few hours under my belt.
You've started experiencing the Asus tricks. Sometimes it's stable, but upon rebooting, it's not anymore. Sometimes it's stable, but lowering the stress by running a higher multi with a lower FSB, and it's not stable anymore!Quote:
Originally Posted by kup
That's Asus :down:
Yeah right.
This kup kid runs prime95 for hours with PLL=1.72v / VTT=1.58v / NB=1.75v and now he complains that his system is not stable anymore?
Of course you are going to degrade some component with those volts, and your system will become random.
You just ruined your system, this is not asus fault.
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/6600/520mhz5hour.jpg
I'll be glad when my Gigabyte has arrived. I've just about had enough of this board. Tested for 5 hours at 500x8.5 blend last night, rebooted, and BSOD. I just don't get it anymore, skews might be a big help, but this amount of inconsistency is enough to drive anyone mad with a quad. This time, each time I changed settings I cleared CMOS and entered exactly the same settings with single adjustments and got to the above point. But the reboot followed by BSOD before login just about took the biscuit. It's a huge shame this board has a lot of great features that I'll miss, but it's also wasted a lot of my time and I will probably sell it.
Dude will you get off my back. I've not degraded anything. If anything the board and chip have improved because this wall existed long before I pushed those volts and clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcio
I'm not some n00b overclocker, I've been overclocking for 9years now, with everything from extreme air cooling to phase change, peltiers, watercooling and volt mods. I've been running with a Q6600 or higher since just after they came out...I know what I'm doing...
The symptoms I'm experiencing are more than likely exactly as Influence has stated, Asus hardware being haunted by little Asus gremlins.
The gremlins were heat related...whack a fan on the CPU power circuitry area and it's fine, take it off and reboot/hard shutdown after a few seconds. Time to strip the board and reapply everything.
EDIT: Odd though that a naked P5Q Pro (only one heatsink on CPU power area) could run it 24/7 Priming @ the same settings with no fans...
Finished redoing the stock heatsinks and I think I've shaved off about 10*c off the PWM temp. Just giving it a test now but so far no random shutdowns...
BAM...shutdown. It seems to be when the PWM hits 50*c it shuts down. :( But over 1.55v vCore really bumps up the temps on it, 34*c atm with 1.55v, 1.575 sores up to 50*c. :(
If I thought redoing TIM would sort mines I would (did all my other Mobos but they ran hot as NForce's).
My Mobo was not one of early ones with badly fitted Heatpipe, my temps are all low, esp PWM's as them little rubber/silicon type strips are crap IMO.
That's not to say they could not be made better as Intel unlike Nvidia do not like heat but do run cooler.
I've gave up on 495+FSB so dropped back to 475FSB on low voltages (1.25v NB+VTT), simply ain't worth the massive increase in all voltages.
I think a CPU Skew of 50ps would have got 495FSB 100% stable and possibly onto 500FSB.
Ok, random question. What third party cooling can I use on the M2F? I couldn't find anything on the Thermalright site but I've got some parts left over from my Rampage Formula (oh how I miss it...) that I could move over to the M2F to cool it better?
Has anyone modded theirs with extra/after market cooling?
I know where you're coming from kup. During the summer I ran my MIIF with a household fan pointed into the case, this prevented it from crashing as often, but it was still unstable.
There's a lot of choice out there in terms of after market cooling, the route I took was to remove the entire heatsink, and put all my own aftermarket cooling on it. I used a pair of enzotech copper mosfet sinks, waterblocks on the CPU and NB, and just some block from another mobo for the SB. The difference I noticed was that the SB gets a little hotter as a result of not being 'connected' with the rest of the board, but the NB is much much cooler (NB doesn't go over 38°C on 1.5v), and the mosfets showed a small improvement. The whole Asus heatsink is a good concept in terms of spreading the heat around the board, but to get all those areas sitting flush with the crucial components it would have to be better engineered. It has been very hit & miss in terms of effectiveness from what I've read.
After realising I wasn't running the 64-bit version of prime for about a week (clicked the wrong d/l link for an update), and getting pretty near stable with that, I did a run at 490x9 with with 64-bit version last night (after 32-bit prime crashed out and I didn't reboot), and for the first time, I'm also 490x9 stable! It seems lowering the VTT to 1.33v could have been key to getting this far, but the weird display hangs I got with the 32-bit version weren't helping much. PWM temps seem to be lower as a result too.
Here's a shot of it still going - I'm scared to reboot because I've got that horrible feeling it'll not be stable afterwards, but will keep you updated if it has in fact helped :)
http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z...90x9stable.jpg
What are you cooling that small section to the left of the northbridge with? The long black section of the boards cooling stock cooling. Do you reckon you could link me to somewhere to the cooling you've used?
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=1298
There's a few pics.
As you can probably see, I'm not cooling to the left of the NB as I don't really think there's a need for it, I think more of the heatsink assembly covering that area is just for show and has made absolutely no difference in terms of stability. There doesn't seems to be any excess heat from any of the components in that area either, and you can probably spot the white, taped up temp sensor, which doesn't report any high temps so I would assume it's safe.
I think your mosfets will definitely need better cooling with those higher CPU volts, my current setup wasn't nearly enough with my old Q6600 at anything over 1.475v so I would assume it would be similar for you. The 45nm CPU obviously uses lower volts and puts less strain on that area of the board, but I'm considering getting a pair of blocks and adding it to the loop just to rule those out. There's some nice, chunky thermalright mosfet sinks available if you fancied going down that route which if mounted well, should improve things a lot more for you.
Yes that area to the left is for show, the chips bellow it do not get/or need cooler.
As usual, I spoke too soon :mad:
Not long after it failed at 4096K (~9 hours), so maybe a little bump in ram or NB voltage could have helped, but after leaving it running for the day, it failed at 96k on the second run whilst only 3 cores were running. As I'm so close to getting stable, I'm giving it another try with a notch in NB to 1.471v, and 1.89 on the RAM. CPU GTLs were set to 10,-45,10,-45.
0,45,0,45 gave a BSOD on login so I think I could actually be getting somewhere with a 50-55mv gap in the CPU GTLs, but with such a long time between tests it gets really finnicky . And this board is probably just playing silly buggers with me again :(
Had a missed delivery though, might be my UD3P from Belgium... I see a silver lining
We have an ANUS support forum at FdL now .. so if you have something to tell .. i will translate it and post it over there ;)
http://www.hardwareluxx.de/community...play.php?f=248
Tell them there Mobos suck cawk, so does their support :P
You see the news the other day, Asus are going fabless with their Mobo's no longer made by their sole contractor.
Link to the news please?Quote:
Originally Posted by humeyboy
And their mobos are the only one I never had any problems with. (except one p5k I pencil modded on wrong place) Am I just lucky or what, I don't know.
Whenever I've changed my mobo from asus to another manufacturer it broke down...
I use Asus for all builds for customers and you get zero issues with normal mid range Mobos. its the £200-300 POS's that are buggy and have dire support.
I do not have link for this (but it was said to be from Xbit website).
QUOTED :
"No before you start to stress -- it simply means that motherboard manufacturing would become outsourced rather then self (in-house) made. Anyway, xbitlabs is reporting that Asustek decided to completely spin off its mainboards and graphics cards manufacturing arm Pegatron Technologies, the company said this week.
The move will allow Asus to become more competitive in terms of branding, but will further withdraw the firm from the actual manufacturing. According to a statement posted with Taiwan Stock Exchange, Asustek company had convened a board meeting to resolve the spin-off of its ODM business. As a result of the meeting, Pegatron Holding, the company that made virtually all Asus-branded motherboards, will issue two billion new shares to a number of shareholders.
Asustek Computer and all shareholders of the company as consideration, among which it is expected that the company will receive 25% of the equity and all shareholders of the company will in total receive 75% of the equity in Pegatron Holding in proportion to their shareholdings in the company.
As a result of the move, Asus-branded mainboard are likely to be targeted not only on the highest possible quality market, but also onto performance mainstream segment. The question is what can a premium brand offer in the value segment ? "
But today there is more accurate info :
QUOTED :
" Asustek splits Pegatron from the rest
Written by Andreas G 14 December 2009 21:40
Electronics giants Asustek (better known for its brand ASUS) has decided to restructure the company similar to what AMD did a while back. It had decided to sell its wholly owned subsidiary Pegatron Technology that manufactures Asustek's and other companies' products.
Why is it Asustek wants to separate manufacturing and development? In Asustek's case it is simply because to avoid competing with itself. ASUS started as a motherboard manufacturer and it is still making a lot of motherboards per contract with many great PC builders; HP, Dell and others.
Now that Asustek has expanded its business to making its own computers, it all started with the very successful Eee series, the orders from other companies have reduced. They have been worried that ASUS would get advantages and in the long run would give them insight into how other companies was planning to act.
At the same time it wants to avoid supporting direct competitors by buying from them. Now that it separates the manufacturing from the rest, where Asustek will only own 25%, it hopes to remove all doubt that an order made to Pegatron Technology till be the same as with any other manufacturing company, for instance competitor Foxconn.
The change will not affect the brand ASUS, but it should result in an even brighter future for Asustek. "
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,10413.html
As you can probably guess, I got my UD3P and it's quite simply the board to take overclocking quads to the next level with. After many wasted months farting around with the MIIF I've finally got the UD3P in there, and got the system stable at 500x9, and with less volts than I expected and in about 1000th of the time. I no longer have to deal with the mind f******g inconsistencies of the MIIF anymore, and move over to new pastures. It's a big shame this board didn't fare as well because I like the look and features. I would probably have settled with 500x9 if it were possible, but I firmly believe that ~490fsb was the limit with this board and a quad.
I would like to thank everyone for taking their time to help out with the MIIF though, I have learnt so much whilst posting here. But it's probably safe to say that I'll sell my board and give this thread a fond farewell.
Unfortunately a not-so fond farewell to Asus is due as I fell we've all been really short-changed with this board. One prime example is the memory pull-ins which are still not working along with their lame responses to requests to fix such things - very poor show.
Rant over :)
Ciao peeps :peace:
Sounds good. Good to hear you're having fun with your new board! :up: I might move away from this POS in a little while too. To be honest, I too, am getting fed up with these inconsistencies and crappy clocking. By the way, have you tried finding your max benchable FSB on your new board yet? With the x6 multiplier? I'm eager to see some results ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by In-Fluence
I managed 525fsb without really trying hard at all. x6 or x9 multi made no difference, which also meant I whooped my 10.062 1M pi time by about half a second. I almost booted at 540 and got just past login before it hung - once again, this was without really trying at all. I'm almost certain I could be looking at a benchable 550FSB+ with this CPU and board. I might have a good stab at it with the reapers tonight :)
http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z...10secs1MPI.jpg
i have my multiplier set in bios ... and even on my OC at 4GHz it idles down to .ike 2.5GHz when my computer is doing nothing ... what was the setting to make sure that does not happen?
CE1=Disable.
sweet thanks!:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by humeyboy
so is it better to push the fsb or the multi? after loads of reading i thoght it was better to push the multi rather than the fsb if you can.
am just wondering will this guide still work if im using a higher multi and a lower fsb as opposed to the opposite like he has?
ive read the guide up and down and i just want to know.....
ive been trying to sort out my MF2 and QX6700 for like 3-4 weeks now and its soooo annoying!!!! im SO happy the amazing people at this forum showed me this and i am just amazed with the guy that wrote it!!!! hes going to heaven for helping so many of us!!! lol
Well with a quad, it could hard to get a high bus speed. My q6700 will run 333 fsb with little voltage but anything over 370 fsb is pushing it. I go further with my x48 blackops than the M2F board. I went from bios 1901 to 2202 and everything has changed, I can not get to 533-540 fsb. Best of luck.
hows the 2022 bios?Quote:
Originally Posted by thedan55
i have a qx9650 and i have been trying to OC it ...
i cant seem to get stable at 4GHz with over 1.53vcore and other settings upped ... with the 0503 bios
are you getting a higher OC with the multi overclocking or FSB?
the 2202 is nice its got some good stuff but ALOT OF STUFF, and some i have no clue as to what they are lol but am sure i will after i finally get this machine stable. im not as experienced as everyone here ive only been overclocking mildy in the past but wanted to try a bit more with this cpu. am getting a better result with the 12 multi than the fsb.Quote:
Originally Posted by Copenhagen69
am not going to 4ghz i just want to stay at 3.5 and ill be pretty happy
the system will be pretty stable but get lags and crashes when i try cpu intensive work and when am in prime 95
i really want to get this done as i was really excited to finally get a good system and i dont wanna get disappointed..more so !!
Well, in your scenario, you have the advantage of an unlocked multiplier, so you don't need to put any strain on the motherboard or memory system by overcloking the fsb. Most of us with locked multis need to increase fsb to get the desired speeds. Theoretically, you should be able to keep everything at default (except voltages), and just up the multiplier and vcore, whilst keeping everything else at near to default voltages. Keep an eye on temperatures, and make sure everything stays below 65°C. A lot of it is trial and error, and you will probably spend a few more weeks tweaking away, the key is to make notes about what settings affect stability.Quote:
Originally Posted by thedan55
If you want more specific info, I would try to get to a point where you are nearly stable, and fill out a settings template which are scattered throughout this thread, then we may be able to advise on some changes.
1.53vcore is WAYYYY too high! Get off that 0503 bios too, that's a very old, unstable one!Quote:
Originally Posted by Copenhagen69
Let me know how you get on with 1901 - that is what worked best for me ;)
this is where i am at the mo
my fsb is 290 x 12x
CPU VCORE-1.37500
PLL V-1.53975
FSB TERMINATION/VTT- 1.31200
DRAM V- 1.89275 (ram is running at 872mhz)
NBCORE - 1.24575
SB CORE 1.5 - 1.50000
SB 1.1 CORE - 1.10000
THIS LASTED FOR <5 MINS THEN BSOD'D ON ME AND IS ALMOST ALWAYS CORE 4 ON PRIME95
this is really stressing me out and i really wanted this cpu to work well so i could get on with my stuff . I feel really disappointed lol
i must have started from scratch like 15 times!
ok ill try the 1901 BIOS ... ya i didnt stay at 1.53 haha i was there for like 5 minutes ...
right now im at 3.72GHz @ 1.37Vcore ...
hoping to get 4GHz but i know anything over 1.4 on these 45nm chips is really bad for them ...
@ thedan:
I assume this is failing on 1024k test in p95?
What's your performance level set to? If it's too low this can cause instability, set it to 12 to rule this out. Try setting your clock twister to moderate/light/lighter too.
Have you tried adjusting CPU/NB skews? If I remember correctly, 100/300 worked best for me, these have a large affect on stability and they could just be out.
@copenhagen:
I expect 1901 to work wonders for you in comparison. Never had a need to try anything below 1301.
[QUOTE=In-Fluence;4190792]@ thedan:
I assume this is failing on 1024k test in p95?
What's your performance level set to? If it's too low this can cause instability, set it to 12 to rule this out. Try setting your clock twister to moderate/light/lighter too.
Have you tried adjusting CPU/NB skews? If I remember correctly, 100/300 worked best for me, these have a large affect on stability and they could just be out.
ill try the nb cpu skews (im still new to this) and its the small ffts 8k that it fails on i havent tried any other tests on p95
shall i leave the setting of default or still follow the guide in this thread?
installed the new 1901 bios ...
everytime i try to OC i get this error "CPU core to bus ratio or VID configuration has failed"
the heck does that mean?
my settings were:
12x280 - 12x300 - 12x250 ... is my multi causing this?
I just switch to bios2 it was 1307, only saw 3gb of my 4gb. So I went to asus and downloaded 1901 and did update in asus auto update in windows. This bios clocks much better. 2202 does not even come close to 1901. I just ran a stress test at 533 fsb and no issue. My cpu multi is at 7. Now just to find the max cpu clock speed. It would be nice to have a quad run like this. Say what is normal temp for the NB? Is it worth getting the swiftech water block for the NB?
Since I installed this mobo in my stacker 830 I haven't been able to get the stacker's front usb to work. The cables are connected to the mobo headers but when I plug a flash drive in they don't even light up. Any ideas?
Before this board I had an evga 780i and the front usb ports worked fine so maybe the usb ports just aren't getting voltage or something? The rear usb ports directly on the mobo work fine.
Excuse me if these ideas are obvious, but its all I can think of right now.
1. Double check to make sure the header went on properly, if you have to pull off and push back on. You never know.
2. Check to make sure the header is enabled in the bios. Many mobo headers can sometimes be disabled by default.
3. Simply try a different header. On modern mobos there are usually more than one USB header. Swap the cable to a different one to rule out a bad header or cable.
Other than that maybe you got a bad header or the cable went bad during the swap out. Good luck...
Are you guys still using LLC on the 45nm chips without a problem? Reason I ask is I re-ran Prime and LinX tonight after trusting my 4Ghz oc for a long time (LLC off.) Both programs were packing up almost immediately :( I tried upping vcore a tad more - vcore (1.3625v) CPU PLL (1.52v) VTT (1.2v) NB (1.3v) and all sorts of combinations but nothing seemed to work. I got more and more peed off and thought I'd just try LLC, so I lowered vcore to 1.275v and PLL, VTT etc to my normal low levels and ran the stress test again (LLC on).. Immediately the system was stable again :) This got me thinking that perhaps having LLC turned off (for over a year) thus requiring higher vcore etc is a bad thing because without LLC I seems to have suffered some sort of degredation which is now requireing more volts to get everything stable again? So again back to the question what are you guys doing regarding LLC these days?
Regards
Orb
I'm pretty sure nothing's wrong with your chip. Don't worry.
And your voltage settings in BIOS are obviously going to be higher with LLC off than with LLC on.
I wonder if perhaps the system has become unstable since changing the PSU then as it's the only thing I've changed since noticing the instability? Although I did have a good PSU previously too (Corsair TX750.) Is running LLC alright these days as it was considered a no no when the 45nm chips came out?
whats LLC?
Load Line Calibration. I suggest using it if you're planning to achieve high overclocks.
oh ok .. ya i use LLC
that board looks like sex..i want one.
hey lads ive been following the guide here and ive just finished testing my CPU GTLS and everything went fine with the testing and all.
but now when i restart my system it wont post it will just hang, i force switch it off switch on again and post will give me this error
"CPU TO CORE BUS RATIO OR VID CONFIG HAS FAILED"
so i go back into the bios change nothing then posts and gets into windows fine, but when i restart or shut down same thing?!?!??!?!
ive changed the VCC but makes no difference
any help please?
oh i changed the fsb strap from 333 to auto and worked fine.
any ideas??? should i leave it on auto?while i continue oc'ing
The 333 Strap is buggy, notice how it reads 1mhz over for Memory you set to 1:1 with the FSB !
I ain't sure if it really is 1mhz out or just a bad reading.
For me 333 is more stable than 400 which is weird as 333 is tighter.
Not seen that one before. Have you tried removing the CPU, and powering up without it? This gives a hard reset and clear CMOS well. Worked most of the time when I had persistent issues with posting.Quote:
Originally Posted by thedan55
Pulling all Memory and powering up was way to reset on a NF2, CPU removal is a bit of a choir.
thing was i was testing all the gtls on 333 then all of a sudden said that. changed to auto and not had an error since but not finished overclocking with that guide yet tho
so just wondering shall i ignore the 333 strap error and carry on overcloking or take the memory out and in then see what happenes?
hey lads i tested all the gtls and the longest i got on prime without a crash was 1.19. im going to use that as my gtl is that ok??
in the guide it says you would want one that lasts like 5 mins but that was my longest.
oh and i left my fsb strap on auto, took the memory out and still crashed on 333.
the result i got for 1.19 was on ddr2-872mhz i want to change that and test again on 978 or something around that. it will be faster on the latter right?
this board is quite a big challenge lol
Guys. Can you share with your BIOS settings for Dual Cores oc`ed 500x9 ?
These always seem to work great for meQuote:
Originally Posted by WaterFlex
http://www.xtremesystems.org/Forums/...16#post3469516
A bit too much to read. Simple question - is it a good board?
DonNiger
Yes, this board is great. But why not to go with i5/i7?
That depends on what you want to do with it. For a 24/7 board they're great with duals, mine clocked ram quite well, but they can't handle quads like the UD3P/R's.Quote:
Originally Posted by DonNiger
Hey guys i want to know what is the best bios for ocing a e8XXX.
Because i am with the same bios from almost 2 years.
I want to lower my vcore a little more because now it is 1.24 for 4.1 ghz i want a little lower.
this is where i am at the mo
my fsb is 513 x8
CPU VCORE-1.26( 1.24 real)
PLL V-1.57950
FSB TERMINATION/VTT- 1.33200
DRAM V- 2.19
NBCORE - 1.29
SB CORE 1.5 - 1.55000
SB 1.1 CORE - 1.15000
It seems most agree that 1901 is the best OC'ing bios, at least Ive seen it mentioned quite a few times throughout this thread....Quote:
Originally Posted by STEFANOVASJ
Absolutely no difrene when changing bios.
Today i tried to oc my cpu to 4.8 but it doesent want i keep increasing voltages but it boots up windows and blue screen.
vcore 1.53
north bridge 1.42
cpu pll 1.60
vtt.137
and it didnt want to do anything diffreremt when i keep raising
on 4.7 it boots and goes trough benchamks without problems on 1.48 vcore
hello people
I buy this mobo , it is great , my q9550 works with 4,1 ghz /1,336V (vid 1,2875V) , that all , I can not get fsb 495mhz , but I'm happy , for me this is enough , sorry for my bad English , kind regards from Poland
Hi ajdaho welcome to XS.
Nice overclock, you've done better than quite a few people in terms of maximum stable FSB with a quad on this board.
may be this will be helpful for others :
http://images8.fotosik.pl/191/76e802e62b93fa60m.jpg
http://images8.fotosik.pl/191/a428591e50ed7221m.jpg
http://images8.fotosik.pl/191/c6f66335d751e6cem.jpg
http://images8.fotosik.pl/191/ea0d7c13be582b76m.jpg
http://images8.fotosik.pl/191/0e3245f33dbf4d68m.jpg
and my "monster":
http://images8.fotosik.pl/191/9978b0b3aed56001m.jpg
Is it stable, no mention of Prime/IBT etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by CryptiK
I got to 495FSB with some stability only due to the , If I was able to set the CPU/NB Skews more precisely.
If the NB was in in 50ps steps instead of 100ps steps I think 495 and 500 would be stable.
Whatever evga/gigabyte/msi tries to do Asus always stays on top when it comes to mobo's and custom vga's (maybe not msi lightning 260/275)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajdaho
:)
You would be better of running the newer builds of Prime95 so you can do all 4 Cores in 1 app. ;)
I'm swapping my X48 board for one of these. Should arrive tomorrow. Looking forward to it!
Is there a hacked or modded bios for this board?
I seem to have hit a fsb wall at 495fsb stable will boot at 500 but will not make it into windows.
I have the 2202 bios in it at the moment and the other one is a 13 somthing version.
I have had my q9550 at 495x8.5 and 495x8 and it still stops at the same fsb everytime.
The guy who did mod a bios or 2 spat the dummy and went of in a huff.
Your lucky to even get past 475FSB (if that's actually stable in Prime and IBT) on a Quad on this buggy/unsupported Mobo.
Simply not true - it's common to see 480+ on the MF2 with Q9550/Q9650. I settled for 478 daily because I wanted to keep my CPU at 1.35v, but it was stable over 480 at the same settings.Quote:
Originally Posted by humeyboy
http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/m...00mhz1352v.png
How is it not true ?Quote:
Originally Posted by LennyRhys
How many in this very forum have stated 475FAB is about the Max stable inc myself ?
Just because you say different does not make it an average !
I have gotten 495FSB but it was a PIA to get and not reliable each reboot so 475 is my limit.
I have benched at 500FSB but 1 reboot later it cannot even post Windows.
There is a few peeps with 500FSB but that's rare and does not change the fact I stated above.
The pattern I found was the same as nearly everyone else with similar hardware as myself be it on this forum or another forum.
This Mobo is a POS for Quads and anyone here with half a clue knows this.
I'm sure if you contest this a few others will chime in that dumped this Mobo for the Gigabyte and never looked back.
I have ran it at 490x8 for just over a month and it was fine.I guess im expecting too much out of this board.
My nb voltage was at 1.40
I'm just thinking the bios is too complex for many users... plus with P45 having good rams is a must...
Take a look at the QVL, its a total joke the lack of support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
500FSB should be nothing fancy to set as Memory is only 1000mhz @ 1:1 which in my case would be underclocked.
I can say for certain that the peeps here now on Gigabytes were not n00bs and were to blame for not getting 500FSB stable on a Quad on this Mobo.
If someone gets lucky and gets 500FSB at decent voltage then they got lucky with 3 main parts of their rig playing nicely.
Good sample of this Mobo+Memory+good sample of CPU, possibly lowish VID.
Nice results, what is the VID on your CPU?Quote:
Originally Posted by LennyRhys
can you show me your bios settings ?Quote:
Originally Posted by humeyboy
A few others - you mean the :cheer: UD3P cheerleading squad :cheer: ? The guys who went for Gigabyte did so because they wanted 500FSB, not because the MF2 is a POS. Some guys just want that extreme factor; others, like me, are happy with less than 500MHz on the FSB.Quote:
Originally Posted by humeyboy
I'm not saying the board is the best (it simply isn't, not even close) but it certainly doesn't deserve to be called a POS, because it's the best P45 board I've ever owned/worked with. :yepp:
Cheers :up: It's not mine (any more) but it was a cracker - 1.225 VID, and scaled nicely.Quote:
Originally Posted by hallryu
If I can be bothered to boot to Bios and write them down but I'm playing Bioshock 2 (PC) for now and watching 24 later. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ajdaho
I have to say as an MIIF owner (and a few Asus products), that it is a good board. It has features you would never see on a Gigabyte like temp sensor connectors and the LCD poster, both of which I found useful, and miss to a certain degree. There is the unfortunate fact that the board really didn't like going anywhere beyond 490 fsb for stability, but on the other hand it remained stable at around 0.05 lower vcore then my UD3P at a slightly lower 484x9. Getting the CPU stable beyond it seemed possible, but only by a few mhz, the NB becomes virtually impossible to stabilise beyond here though.
Since I moved over, the one key thing setting I thought might make a difference on the MIIF (if they ever bothered to update the bios) would be to change the CPU/NB skew step amounts which are 100 compared to the Gigabyte's 50. This made a big difference once going beyond 490 with the same components on the UD3P.
I would still say that given the fact that my Gigabyte is still going strong and I've even managed to get some HWbot points, I will be sticking with it, but only time will tell if those 6 phases are likely to hold out (It likes to have a little squeal when I stress it). I wouldn't blame anyone for sticking with their MIIF, but if you want to move freely whilst squeezing the most out of your RAM & CPU, and even go for some records, then the UD3P is the way to go.
All these opinions are from my own experience and I know that others have done better (and worse) than me when trying to attain that 500FSB stability.
I for one am keeping mine for dual benching... if I werent such a noob at figuring out skew settings above 570fsb I would have soo much more fun with this mobo. :D My current fsb limit is ~575 using a e8xxx cpu. I still have some learning to do for nailing tighter PL's above 530fsb..but overall.. dual-core with this mobo is a breeze. Not so lucky with Q4 benching though...as stated above I have found somewhat of a 'hard-limit' for Q4 stability..regardless of 65nm or 45nm, 460-~485 was the highest I could reach...even then things are a little rocky with stability. :(
@ leegoofd - I bench wiff craps RAMz on meh MIIF..:D curious why you say you need 'gooder'?
I think what Leeg means is that the P45 likes the 5:6 ratio for memory so if you're benching above 500 FSB and want to use that ratio, you need 1200+ capable DDR2.
The most popular kit for high-end P45 boards is the GSkill Pi 9600 4GK which costs £200. :eek:
Mmm I see.. I have not benched 5:6 above 500fsb..as I dont have any RAM that is 1200+ capable... just spend all my hardware $$ elsewhere before I ever get the chance to buy some real good stix :D
..Dewar in one hand... Gskill in the other... Dewar it is. ...NB pot in one hand.. Gskill in the other... NB pot it is.. etc.etc.
Lo mister OCN,Quote:
Originally Posted by CL3P20
Quads OC better with a divider on the Asus range... so for 500FSB and more you need 1200+ rams like Lenny indicated ( this will stabilise things loads )
On the P5Q series I could run a lower PL with rams on another divider than 1:1... I have primed the 9650 at 500FSB with 1200mhz on the rams with ease, 500/1000 needed far too much GTL/Skew tweaking.
Plus like many already mentioned : a very frustrating experience as it was stable one moment, unstable an hour later when doing a retest... but nowhere near as bad as P45 with DDR3 lol...
Dual cores OCing as expected is far easier... hope to see some good scores in the LCC dude... trying to get hold off an I7 mobo...
I would buy 1200mhz Memory if I thought :
1) It would run ok as of lack of support in the QVL.
2) It was 2x2GB kits for 8GB (2x kits)total
3 ) getting off the 1:1 Ratio would help the FSB reach 500.
I've had 8GB of Dominator rev 1.1 @1175mhz with 2.1v and no major tweaks while on a Dual Core but on a Quad it acts up about 1135-1150mhz.
Some peeps got 1200mhz on the same rev 1.1 Memory, I cannot even with 1 Module, major tweaks and extra voltage.
I'm stable at 4.203 GHz at the moment. I think my Memory will possibly restrict me going any higher at the moment. I'm still getting to grips with this BIOS, which has more settings than you can shake a stick at. Happy so far!:D
Yes, take a look at this startpost (from a german forum): http://www.hardwareluxx.de/community...71&postcount=1Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowScorpion
But it didn`t change sth. in OC for me, so I am using the - mBIOS.1901.101 with the new ROMs for Marvell/Intel Controller only and without any other tweaks.
..Noted... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
..as for the LLC.. heres a peek... Im getting closer :D
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=1019761 ..still on PL10 too...got some special Crucial 2x1's coming in this week..good for 1300+mhz... should help quite a bit!!
Don't overdo it or you will us make to sell them Extreme boards :)
6.5 multi with 615FSB might be a killer setup for the compo...it could be a winner in pi 1M... if it was 32Mb you would be slayed... or at least chopped in half :D
NiceQuote:
Originally Posted by ajdaho
What bios are you using?
Yes, looks very nice to see another 500fsb stability attempt although I would say at just an 8x multi that things would always be easier to stabilise, and 12K fft test is where the CPU strain really begins to max out.
I'm tempted to have another go with my G.Skill PIs on this board, but I'm already aware of how much time I've wasted trying to get 500fsb stable. I'm also keeping an ear out for some feedback about something that may contribute to the MIIF cause for better fsb stability with quads, but I'm kind of going out on a limb... here's to hoping though :)
bios is 2202 , i try also do it, in bios 1602 , but in this bios was bug , whatever i put in multiplier (6 or 7 or 8 or 7,5 ) mobo always use 8,5 when fsb exceed 490mhz