Sorry for your loss doc, not a very good xmas pressi :caution:Quote:
Originally Posted by pcdoc1
Now I am sure I wont be putting my X2 in this board :cussing:
Printable View
Sorry for your loss doc, not a very good xmas pressi :caution:Quote:
Originally Posted by pcdoc1
Now I am sure I wont be putting my X2 in this board :cussing:
jinu, hes not dfi incarnated :P
there are many reps on xs that dont want their true identity known, and guess why? because people will see them as thei companies they work for incarnated and either love them for the products of their companies or hate them for the products of the companies they work for. the latter especially is keeping them hiding i guess :D
i can only repeat myself, please be nice to him.
as far as i know hes is on xs in his free time!
pcdog, damn, sorry to hear :(
so the bios dos not fix the issue appearently?
or this is another issue...
i remember that one of mikes boards he sent in had the same thing, some chip probably controlling vcore was burned and the mosfet nearest to it was burned as well.
from my understanding it works like this:
you desing the board and its power circuits to support the range of vcore vdimm etc you want in the final product, usually you add some headroom to have them fully stable etc.
the problem that probably kills hardware is that the voltages are set higher or lower than what they should be. how come?
well how does the mainboard know what voltages to set anyways?
i initially thougt that if you just power it up with everything at default, the power circuit will run at default wich means 1.5v for vcore for example.
but here it starts, 90nm cpus start with 1.4v on the mainboard even with everything set to default.
so the bios configures the power circuit to put out either 1.4v or 1.5v depending on what you you plug in.
this means the default voltage of the power circuit itself, without the bios configuring it, could be 1.4v and gets bumped for 130nm cpus, or it could be 1.5v and gets reduced for 90nm cpus....OR it could be a completely different voltage! and thats where things get interesting.
as far as i know variable voltages are produced using one feed voltage wich should be above the maximum voltage you want as a result.
so if you want to be able to switch between 3v 5v 8v you should use a feed voltage of at least 10v, then you add a set of resistors wich each reduces the voltage, and then you individually switch them off and on and can create different voltages to power your hardware with. easy.
so you can enable some resistors and disable others and can increase the voltage step by step. but what if they arent configured?
depending on the way you designed the power circuit and set up the resistors the default voltage of the design can be higher or lower than the default voltage you actually would want to power your hardware with.
if all resistors are set to default, it could mean they are all disabled and you get the highest possible voltage the circuit was designed to deliver.
and this is what might actually have happened on the boards.
when you boot the board the bios configures all the voltages on the board and sets them to what it thinks is default. so no hardware gets damaged, the resistors probably get configured before the circuit is actually powered and produces vcore, so that the first vcore the cpu gets is some good clean 1.5v or 1.4v, whatever its default vcore is. same for the other voltages.
i think this is the "default values" dfi mentioned get lost, or can get lost.
the problem could be several things:
-the vcore circuit gets powered up before the vcore is configured correctly, "just" some bad timing
-the bios doesnt know anymore how to configure the circuit because the data was erased or corrupted
-OR, its not the bios after all! its the chip that is supposed to set the right voltages that fails and all voltages get set to default or to random settings resulting in voltages way out of spec for the cpu and maybe vdimm as well (could be that the voltage control chip that dfi uses and that was burned on one of mikeguavas boards controlls vdimm and vcore)
this is all speculation, i dont know sht about designing circuits :D
i dont eve know how to find a vmod on my own :lol:
and i just got home from nightshift and worked from 9pm to 6am so forgive me if i wrote up some bs :D
im just trying to make sense of all the things i heard about this issue
EDIT: pcdog, the second cpu you put in fried the power circuit, right?
and the same thing happened on mikeguavas board...
now was that second cpu you put in a 130nm cpu?
if yes than this is very interesting.
mikeguava also used a 130nm cpu in at least one of his boards, if it was the board that got the fried power circuit thats interesting.
130nm a64s have a default vcore of 1.5v, 90nm 1.4v
if the voltages get set to default for some reason the vcore could be higher for 130nm cpus than 90nm cpus, hence the circuit burns out with a 130nm cpu but doesnt get damaged with a 90nm cpu and only kills the cpu. if the vcore that gets apllied after the default settings have been lost, that kills the cpus, is actually higher for 130nm cpus than for 90nm cpus then the power circuit doesnt completely fail but still works to some degree.
hmmmm this would actually point to the vid special control wich lets you increase the vcore in percentages. its using the normal vcore as base. the base vcore is higher for 130nm cpus, hence the resulting voltages with special vid applied are way higher on a 130nm cpu compared to a 90nm cpu.
so if it turns out that 130nm cpus kill the boards if the issue happens and the default settings get lost somehow, while 90nm cpus dont and only get fried, then it would mean the special vid setting is the problem.
theoretically it'd be smart to start the board up at ~1.5v reguardless of the CPU used then lower it as the bios settings are loaded during the POST process...
which happens to be what brought about cold boot (post technically) problems and vdroop mods to begin with somewhat..
on a related note, there are CPU's that use less than 1.4v at default, saaya ;)
ok i just purchase the EXPERT board but this Kill CPU stuff is Scare me!!Quote:
Originally Posted by pcdoc1
and looks like even the 12-07 BIOS is not Fix the problem!! there still more bug that kill CPU!! what can i do now!!
i buy this mainboard at the shop that taken 15% restocking fee if i return it unopen:mad: or should i try my luck!!
one of my friend have the EXPERT and he buy from the shop i got mine from and he haven't have a Single issue yet!!
This is RDX200, but with the same power regulator and mosfets like Expert...
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...54&postcount=1
I feel the same way. . . . I've had an Expert sitting in a box under my desk for two weeks along with a Opteron 148. I just finished my finals and I was totally excited about setting up the new system this weekend. . . . But now I'm just hoping that my Opteron doesn't get cooked. . . . I guess we'll see. (I'm still gonna risk it of course. :D )Quote:
Originally Posted by z24
The second cpu was a 130 and it's interesting it wasn't trashed..... When I fired it up the first time it did nothing, not even the fans would run. I shut it down and fired it up again and this time the mosfets smoked instantly, but what was strange is that I couldn't get to the PS switch for maybe 3 to 4 seconds and after the smoke cleared but before I got it shut off the fans fired up..... I did try to bring it up again and of course no luck. And supprisingly the 3000 still works. During the bench build and prior to any attempt to get to board running with either cpu I had cleared cmos so all voltages were board/bios defaults....Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Since I panicked and red labeled another board from newegg, and now have an rma with Monarch on this one, I'm not certain what I'm gonna do. Mwave sent me to AMD for a opty rma so the jury is still out there. Of course if I end up eating a dually I'll certainly lose my sense humor 'bout this whole thing. This is my main home box so I need to get it back up, but I'm certainly not putting another dually it for now. Guess I through a 3000 or 3200 at it until something gets resolved..... I'm sure loving the CeleronM lappy I'm using, think it will clock??;) ;) Regards-
i know, and yeah the ideal design would produce around 1.5v if its at default and not configured... but if you want a wide range of voltages you might have to set the ciruit up so the default uncofnigured voltage is higher than that... i dont know... lack of knowledge there.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
or they ignored this all along because the power cicuit is not supposed to get powered up anyways before its configured correctly... they probably didnt think there would be problems with this.
but then again the older boards had this issue partially as well afaik, but maybe they didnt think it was necessary or didnt have the time to redesign it.
if you have an expensive cpu, or a really good overclocker then i would wait or return the board. if not then go ahead and use the board, its unlikely that something happens, but if it does you can rma the board and the cpu afaik.Quote:
Originally Posted by z24
dumo, can you post a pic of it showing half or the entire board? i cant really see where this is on the board.
hmmm it could also be that when you started the system and nothing happened and then you shut it down and powered it up again, and the mosfets burned out, maybe the default values got lost at the first attempt to boot, and then when you booted again it was the circuits default values wich were way too high = circuit burned out.Quote:
Originally Posted by pcdoc1
130nm cpus seem to be more resistant to high voltages, so im not that surprised it survived actually.
can you please post pics of the board and the burned ciruit? is it the same mosfet dumo posted a pic of? too bad malves isnt around, his expert input would surely be interesting...
and yes, pentium m cpus clock really nice ;)
my 2 year old 1.4ghz banias 130nm pentium m clocks to over 2.1ghz on air :D
max with stock vcore was 1.9ghz more or less.
the first celeron m chips were relabeled banias chips, if your lucky you have a dothan based celeron m, those are made in 90nm and should clock a lot better, at least 2.2ghz with stock vcore id say.
the problem is that eist wont work because afaik all celeron m chips have their multipliers disabled and only the default one works.
you can still try:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...id=40562&stc=1
but afaik your only option to oc it will be through the fsb, wich means you will most likely be limited by the chipset. if its 915 thats best, should be possible to hit 200fsb on that in theory. the locks are very buggy on this intel chipset though, so if an fsb doesnt work then try to jump for a higher fsb.
on the p4gd1 based on 915p you can fix the lock issue by increasing the pciE speed, but i doubt thats possible on a laptop. and maybe the locks arent enable and you increase pci speeds along with the fsb, so be carefull :D
133fsb should work though and the locks should work fine to at least this point and a lil higher, lets say 145fsb 150fsb.
the only way to increase fsb in windows is using clockgen or cpufsb though. cpufsb supports a load of plls while clockgen has versions for each pll. you have to know your pll though... so you have to open the laptop :D
or you get cpufsb and try one pll after the other and try if one of them works ^^
ok, enough off topic :D
please post pics of the board :)
The Beta-bioses linked earlier in this thread seem to be gone now. Are the links down coz of some prioblems with those Betas or something else is the reason?
I also have Expert board and Lighspeed waiting for clocking, but i think i'll just run it default, until this thing clears up a bit.
running default doesnt seem to prevent the issue from happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by Juggernaut
i think the betas were pulled from the taiwaneese ftp but were still on the us/global server?
hmmm mfm you ran stock speeds right?
but could it be you still had the vcore set higher because you were testing the system at higher speeds before?
happened to me a few times.
If its going to fry running @ default wont save you :nono:Quote:
Originally Posted by Juggernaut
the gloabl dfi site is down? :confused:
is it just me or is the site down?
Yes Saaya....@ stock speeds, default vcore (1.4v - for my FX-55)!Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I'm really curious why thera are only GOOD news at their site...
Nothing about problems resoved or not...
In order to take pics I'll have to remove the mosfet heatsinks, I'm certain that will hose my rma with Monarch... :D :D If I get any indication that the rma isn't gonna work out anyway, I post 'em............Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
post pics with the heatsink on like dumo did :)
Hirotaro, i dont think any mfg posts bad news on their site :/
MFM, can you post a pic of your board?
did the mosfets burn as well?
so here we have a 130nm cpu that died from this issue hmmmm
can you explain in detail what exactly happened before the board died and then what happened?
Sorry Saaya..but not now....!! Too late m8 ! I already sent my mobo for the store where I bought it, and sent my FX-55 SD 0.90nm (not a 130nm Saaya) and 2GB Patriot Mems to RMA !! The mosfets they seem to be ok!Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I waited too much for a simple word from DFI and until today....nothing!!! I don't want never more this mobo or other from DFI!!!
I already wrote about that on PedroRocha thread! Post #91. Link:http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...t=82281&page=4Quote:
can you explain in detail what exactly happened before the board died and then what happened?
PS- Thx Saaya for your time, trying to help us!!!
Oh I will be gentle and nice (within my reason lol) after all, only board that killed for me was Ultra and SLI not expert. BTW, nice job you are doing Saaya :) I like your reasoning and to certain degree, I do agree. All new Asus board seems to initialize at the setting user set minus their enable extra v-core thing which might be what is going on back ground on DFI boards as well. Like the % setting doesn't apply till initialization is over. Question is as you said, what does it start with to begin with... that we have no idea until bit more accurate measuring tool can be used. (Digital DMM with readout at very high frequency or O-scope with very big memory or recording feature). Or get some idea from DFI people (glances around :P)
But that's not an ordinary case and thay should say something official or even exchange boards on bug-free revisions...
MFM, sorry to hear :(
i hope it all goes well and you get the hardware replaced.
too bad dfi didnt contact you, your board could have helped them to find the issue and fix it :/
maybe they didnt want/need your board because they already found the issue and are working on it now?
and thx :)
jinu117, so the asus boards boot with default vcore at first and then apply the increase vcore people set in bios?
hmmm depending on how fast the vcore gets apllied this could also lead to two problems.
1. cpu cant boot at high overclocked speeds because the vcore is too low when the cpu gets initialized with the overclocked speed.
2. if the vcore gets apllied all the sudden it jumps from default to increased wich could also harm the cpu
oh and thx :)
what do you mean wih ordenary case?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hirotaro
im not sure about exchanging boards... if there is a new revision of the boards that fixes this issue then im sure dfi will replace older revisions with this new board for free... or at least i hope they do/will do.
maybe bulldog14 can help us answering this question.
i wish i had an oscope or a high speed dmm :D
could check on my dfi nf4 ultra d then, afaik its at least similar to the new dfi boards and some parts seem to be almost identical?
at least the initialization process seems to be similar or identical.
Nope, its down for me too. I just installed my new DFI Expert & Vapo LS last night and finsihed all my software this morning. I tried to reboot into the bios and I do not get the post screen. I have tried a dozen times and its still the same thing. Is this the boot issue someone mentioned earlier? I cannot even try the beta bios cause the site is down. Looks like I'm screwed until the DFI site is up...:clap: :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
I was just on the tw sight and it looks like 12-07 has been pulled..... 11-25 is still there though. kraggy, if you looking for 11-25 and can't get there let me know I can email to ya......
wow, i hope your boards isnt dead :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by kraggy
do the fans still spin up?
not sure i got right what you mean, the board boots but you cant save any setting in bios or the board boots but you cant load windows, or the board doesnt boot at all?
did you try to reset cmos? dont remove the battery though! :D
well the bios doesnt seem to help to prevent this issue appearntly, and using it voids your warranty, so i wouldnt recommend you to use it anyways to be honest.
if you still want it you can pm mdzcpa or other people who posted here that said they flashed to the bios, they should still have it.
but if it was taken down i suspect theres a reason for that...
so i wouldnt use it
btw, i chatted with MFM, he shut down his board at night when he went to bed, the next day he wanted to power it on and it didnt work anymore. he tried to power it on and reset cmos several times but it didnt work, its not clear whether his cpu board and memory were damaged/dead inmediatly or if they died one after one when he tried to get the board to boot again with different components.
however the board is definately dead, the cpu is deifnately dead and the memory is definately dead according to him.
he tried the cpu and memory in other boards and he tried another cpu in the board.
that second cpu was not killed though, is that correct MFM?
did the board still power on when you tried the other cpu?
or was it already dead and didnt boot at all?
was that other cpu 90nm or 130nm?
oh and his dead fx55 was 90nm, not 130nm... so theres still no dead 130nm cpu on this board afaik, only 90nm cpus, right?
It's getting to be a familiar story....... Now I feel fortunate to have not lost my ram....:confused: