The Maximus Formula Thread - Help/OCing/Guide/Rampage conversion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

What exactly is the error?

the dredded nvlddmkm?

---

dunno. Vista doesn't tell you the exact error unless you look it up. This is what vista gives me on the event:

Code:

---

Product
Windows

Problem
Video hardware error

Date
2/16/2008 1:50 PM

Status
Not Reported

Description
A problem with your video hardware caused Windows to stop working correctly.

Problem signature
Problem Event Name:        LiveKernelEvent
OS Version:        6.0.6000.2.0.0.256.1
Locale ID:        1033

Files that help describe the problem
WD-20080216-1344-02.dmp
sysdata.xml
Version.txt

Extra information about the problem
BCCode:        117
BCP1:        FFFFFA8001EFC160
BCP2:        FFFFF98004A525F0
BCP3:        0000000000000000
BCP4:        0000000000000000
OS Version:        6_0_6000
Service Pack:        0_0
Product:        256_1

---

The problem seems to have gone away after I disabled ready boost and after the disk error check found and deleted some files. Could it have been a symptom from errors writtent to the hdd due to a failed stick or RAM?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by binormalkilla

I bought that kit along with my current kit, keeping the best one......which ended up being the Geil, as I couldn't even POST past DDR2-1050 or something like that.
I would try DDR2-1000 5-5-5-15 with the rest at auto for starters.
Go ahead and set the NBV to something high like 1.60-1.65V.

---

Hi binormalkilla,

Thanks for the reply. It's appreciated. Like you I have a huge amount of trouble getting the board to post when it's got this RAM in it. I have the RAM voltage set at 2.1v. It stops at "DET RAM" unless I let it boot with everything else at AUTO. Even then, it fails Memtest within a few seconds. I'll try your suggested settings.

Thank you

I'm so confused right now...

I'm playing around with an e8400 right now and have my FSB @ 500. I can run my ram @ 1200 no problem (333 strap). What makes no sense is that I can't drop it down to 1000 for a 1:1 (333 or 400 strap). Whenever I try, it just won't post.

Can someone explain to me why I can run 1200 with ease but can't even post at 1000 on my ram???

Is there a secret? Fill me in!!!

don't go fracking with the strap setting, never a need for that really.
just use the ram divider setting.

leave strap on auto and let the ram run 1:1

and 400 strap would be like over 1300mhz ram 1:1 or whatever it add's up to.
yes?

My Maximus Formula and Crucial tracer DDR2 8500 LED is on the way now, not sure CPU yet, but just wait for Q9450 (Good price) replace my Q6600.
Need some help with voltage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prodigys

Northbridge :

Ambient = 25.6°C (PC + heater = warm room :p: )
NB temp = 33°C STRESSED
Voltage NB = 1.57V
Cooling = P5E stock cooling + 120mm fan pointed on it

Mods done : did a extra twist on the mounting screws that's it...

(Besides that, I'm running 445 x 8 on AUTO settings again, and it's now 5 hours prime stable. But 445 x 9 gives me after 5 min a error...)

Could this be the CPU ? He did 4Ghz on 1.40Vcore, and on 1.42Vcore he was 3DMark stable...

So the NB can handle the FSB, also the CPU can handle so far 475 FSB.
But high speeds give me lockups, so I think PLL or GTL ref is not good, am I write ?

---

Anybody with more brains off PLL or GTL Ref information that can help me here ?

In short :

CPU can reach 475 FSB on AUTO settings
NB can reach 475FSB on AUTO settings (1.55 vNB)
CPU can run hours and hours stable on 475 x 8.
CPU can NOT run 475 x 9 for 5 min stable....

So the CPU can take the high FSB but not the high speed, besides that it is not to low Vcore but something else, so that's why I ask you guys if GTL ref or PLL can help me out here ? Or something else that I don't think on right now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

well I'm just an uneducated candian that can't really understand the full complexities of thermal tollerance so I will not comment any further.
BUT.... It was always my understanding that cooler was better, hence all the cooling options these days. But again I'm out of my league here , I'll just go sit in the corner now and read my picture book

---

I didn't want to insult you in any way, but in Austria we have an adage, which I try to translate analogously: It ain't what you say but the way that you say it.

I apologize for my not perfect english, but I think everyone understands it.

I'll try to explain some working actions of me, or better of Siemens hardware developement division. That should make it understandable why Intel specs SHOULD absolutely be facts, at least in the way they meant it:

We are a 7 people group working on circuit development for hardware components (including MB's). So maybe you missunderstood this, but I'm not a simple "hardware doctor" working at a computershop and tell customers storys like "that must be a driver issue" if for example cooler doesn't work.

My part is to calculate electric resistivitys, optimal circuit lenghts, optimal circuit placement, and many more. I wouldn't call this a simple job, but I'm happy with it.
And what I can say from this job is that we for sure use parts like Northbridges from original manufacturers like Intel. We didn't work on MB with X38 at the moment, but with NBs prior to this.
And we at Siemens have for our developement also only the Intel specs to work on. If for example we have stability issues with our circuit designs and are sure we calculated all things right it would get a big problem for Intel when we'd find out that this issue is because of Intel gave wrong values for some parameters.
Of course we get partly tech sheets not made public by Intel, but for some specs we also must work with official released ones. So many things like max temps are only definition issues of where this temp is meassured for example.

We get very detailed docs and I can tell you that the max NB temp of X38 is like specified in the thermal design guide.

So really noone must care about really low NB temps around 55 C. There's still enough space for further ocing with such low temp.

But to say it clearly: of course lower temps are always better for long time life and some other continual influence of operations which to explain would be to long for here.
But in general fact is NB temps under 90C loaded are no problem at least in the average lifetime of todays computerparts.

This is what Intel says, this is what my nearly 80 C loaded NB on a 48 hour stresstest (prime95 and 3dm06 running simultaniously) says and this is what should be handled as fact in a quality forum like this here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonofander

I'm so confused right now...

I'm playing around with an e8400 right now and have my FSB @ 500. I can run my ram @ 1200 no problem (333 strap). What makes no sense is that I can't drop it down to 1000 for a 1:1 (333 or 400 strap). Whenever I try, it just won't post.

Can someone explain to me why I can run 1200 with ease but can't even post at 1000 on my ram???

Is there a secret? Fill me in!!!

---

I have the exact same problem! Slower / 1:1 should be the most stable, but I can't even POST to it either in the 400 or the 333. No problems on my QX6700, it's only with the E8400.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonofander

I'm so confused right now...

I'm playing around with an e8400 right now and have my FSB @ 500. I can run my ram @ 1200 no problem (333 strap). What makes no sense is that I can't drop it down to 1000 for a 1:1 (333 or 400 strap). Whenever I try, it just won't post.

Can someone explain to me why I can run 1200 with ease but can't even post at 1000 on my ram???

Is there a secret? Fill me in!!!

---

To post 1:1 on either the 333/400 strap around 500 fsb and above, you need a lot of NB voltage or tight timings Cas4 (best) and TB set to disabled -1. That's what I'm running here. You can try 4-4-4-10(or 12)-2-25(or 30)-3-3-7(or 8)-3-5-4-6-4-6

I'm currently running 8.5x506 at 4-4-4-12-3-30-6-3-8-3-5-4-6-4-6 @ 2.3v. TB disabled level 1. Hope this helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robin77

I didn't want to insult you in any way, but in Austria we have an adage, which I try to translate analogously: It ain't what you say but the way that you say it.

I apologize for my not perfect english, but I think everyone understands it.

I'll try to explain some working actions of me, or better of Siemens hardware developement division. That should make it understandable why Intel specs SHOULD absolutely be facts, at least in the way they meant it:

We are a 7 people group working on circuit development for hardware components (including MB's). So maybe you missunderstood this, but I'm not a simple "hardware doctor" working at a computershop and tell customers storys like "that must be a driver issue" if for example cooler doesn't work.

My part is to calculate electric resistivitys, optimal circuit lenghts, optimal circuit placement, and many more. I wouldn't call this a simple job, but I'm happy with it.
And what I can say from this job is that we for sure use parts like Northbridges from original manufacturers like Intel. We didn't work on MB with X38 at the moment, but with NBs prior to this.
And we at Siemens have for our developement also only the Intel specs to work on. If for example we have stability issues with our circuit designs and are sure we calculated all things right it would get a big problem for Intel when we'd find out that this issue is because of Intel gave wrong values for some parameters.
Of course we get partly tech sheets not made public by Intel, but for some specs we also must work with official released ones. So many things like max temps are only definition issues of where this temp is meassured for example.

We get very detailed docs and I can tell you that the max NB temp of X38 is like specified in the thermal design guide.

So really noone must care about really low NB temps around 55 C. There's still enough space for further ocing with such low temp.

But to say it clearly: of course lower temps are always better for long time life and some other continual influence of operations which to explain would be to long for here.
But in general fact is NB temps under 90C loaded are no problem at least in the average lifetime of todays computerparts.

This is what Intel says, this is what my nearly 80 C loaded NB on a 48 hour stresstest (prime95 and 3dm06 running simultaniously) says and this is what should be handled as fact in a quality forum like this here.

---

In as much as I respect your opinion, you're wrong. You're making a very basic mistake here, and as an engineer I believe you will understand this. A northbridge with a thermal envelope of 90C is NOT rated to run at that temperature at ALL FREQUENCIES. This last word is key, and that is why I said earlier that once you start overclocking, all those numbers are out the window.

This is why cooling is so important in computing. So yes, while the NB would run at 90C at stock without the stress of overclocked components eg. ram and fsb, it will not do so once you factor in these other variables.

This is why I think what you say is so misleading. Intel is not misleading us by saying that the NB will operate normally at 90C because Intel does not, and will not base their figures on overcloked chips. That is why there is always a disclaimer about running components within spec. So if you want to convince me that one can run at 90C at all frequencies, then show me some other numbers, eg. voltages, frequencies, fsbs, etc. To be so adamant about this argument is very interesting because this is XS, and members here do push their equipments to the limit. Heck didn't Intel seek out our very own Fugger to do its demos? If you want to continue this argument, I recommend you qualify some of your statements or show us some screenies of a 'pushed-system' priming large ffts with the nb temps close to 90C :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zucker2k

In as much as I respect your opinion, you're wrong. You're making a very basic mistake here, and as an engineer I believe you will understand this. A northbridge with a thermal envelope of 90C is NOT rated to run at that temperature at ALL FREQUENCIES. This last word is key, and that is why I said earlier that once you start overclocking, all those numbers are out the window.

This is why cooling is so important in computing. So yes, while the NB would run at 90C at stock without the stress of overclocked components eg. ram and fsb, it will not do so once you factor in these other variables.

This is why I think what you say is so misleading. Intel is not misleading us by saying that the NB will operate normally at 90C because Intel does not, and will not base their figures on overcloked chips. That is why there is always a disclaimer about running components within spec. So if you want to convince me that one can run at 90C at all frequencies, then show me some other numbers, eg. voltages, frequencies, fsbs, etc. To be so adamant about this argument is very interesting because this is XS, and members here do push their equipments to the limit. Heck didn't Intel seek out our very own Fugger to do its demos? If you want to continue this argument, I recommend you qualify some of your statements or show us some screenies of a 'pushed-system' priming large ffts with the nb temps close to 90C :D

---

As said, we haven't had X38 in lab till now and of course we do mainly tests within nonoc'ed range. But there's also simulated stress situation testing done. And my PC at home runs at 76 C NB temp when oced and 67 C idle. And this is what I will continue to say, that this is rockstable.

Surely it doesn't automaticaly mean it would run stable at 90C too, but 76 C isn't far away from 90.

Also the argument of the temp/frequency dependency is not that simple. There are other parameters influenced by one of this that MIGHT lead to run stable at 90 C nonoced but not stable at same temp oced.

But this is not tested by anyone (90 C NB temp stability) and I won't make statements that I can't hold.

What I wanted to say I've said. So fact is the max working temp of the X38 NB is 92 C (won't look again in spec, hope this is the right value).
Also fact is that Intel of caurse does this testings in lab with default frequencies. But to say at higher frequencies this isn't valid anymore is simply not true, because other things limit then.

I'm also not going to write here a technical explaination of relations between different factors and at last what counts is profen or already testet facts.

So be sure that fsb oced 76 C loaded NB is rockstable at my board. And honestly, if 90 aren't anymore, I wouldn't care because it looks already so that only I've got that high temp.

So why discuss temps that much that noone ever will reach? Take the knowlage out of this discussion that 76 C is a very good temp for oced NB and is rocklstable in long stresstests and be happy that your NB runs on top temps that will surely never be a limiter to your ocing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robin77

As said, we haven't had X38 in lab till now and of course we do mainly tests within nonoc'ed range. But there's also simulated stress situation testing done. And my PC at home runs at 76 C NB temp when oced and 67 C idle. And this is what I will continue to say, that this is rockstable.

Surely it doesn't automaticaly mean it would run stable at 90C too, but 76 C isn't far away from 90.

Also the argument of the temp/frequency dependency is not that simple. There are other parameters influenced by one of this that MIGHT lead to run stable at 90 C nonoced but not stable at same temp oced.

But this is not tested by anyone (90 C NB temp stability) and I won't make statements that I can't hold.

What I wanted to say I've said. So fact is the max working temp of the X38 NB is 92 C (won't look again in spec, hope this is the right value).
Also fact is that Intel of caurse does this testings in lab with default frequencies. But to say at higher frequencies this isn't valid anymore is simply not true, because other things limit then.

I'm also not going to write here a technical explaination of relations between different factors and at last what counts is profen or already testet facts.

So be sure that fsb oced 76 C loaded NB is rockstable at my board. And honestly, if 90 aren't anymore, I wouldn't care because it looks already so that only I've got that high temp.

So why discuss temps that much that noone ever will reach? Take the knowlage out of this discussion that 76 C is a very good temp for oced NB and is rocklstable in long stresstests and be happy that your NB runs on top temps that will surely never be a limiter to your ocing.

---

dude you are frakking nuts :eek: mabye it is rock stable but dude those temps are nuts! anything that is hot enough to burn human skin is more than enough for me. you must have, as The Duke would say, BALLS OF STEEL :yepp:
im not saying you are wrong... im just saying that i personally would never run any component up to those temps

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robin77

And my PC at home runs at 76 C NB temp when oced and 67 C idle. And this is what I will continue to say, that this is rockstable.

---

Let me put it simply, rock stable at what overclock?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iadstudio

dunno. Vista doesn't tell you the exact error unless you look it up. This is what vista gives me on the event:

Code:

---

Product
Windows

Problem
Video hardware error

Date
2/16/2008 1:50 PM

Status
Not Reported

Description
A problem with your video hardware caused Windows to stop working correctly.

Problem signature
Problem Event Name:        LiveKernelEvent
OS Version:        6.0.6000.2.0.0.256.1
Locale ID:        1033

Files that help describe the problem
WD-20080216-1344-02.dmp
sysdata.xml
Version.txt

Extra information about the problem
BCCode:        117
BCP1:        FFFFFA8001EFC160
BCP2:        FFFFF98004A525F0
BCP3:        0000000000000000
BCP4:        0000000000000000
OS Version:        6_0_6000
Service Pack:        0_0
Product:        256_1

---

The problem seems to have gone away after I disabled ready boost and after the disk error check found and deleted some files. Could it have been a symptom from errors writtent to the hdd due to a failed stick or RAM?

---

I do recall its a 64bit Video driver issue ( but dont quote me on that ) there is a great deal of material on the subject but not 1 clear answer. Vista was buggy in the beginning with ATI drivers in particular and Nvidia but I thought this was all sorted out long ago. Update to the latest drivers if you have not already and maybe try SP1 RTM. It might be memory related but I never saw it referenced b4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by binormalkilla

I bought that kit along with my current kit, keeping the best one......which ended up being the Geil, as I couldn't even POST past DDR2-1050 or something like that.
I would try DDR2-1000 5-5-5-15 with the rest at auto for starters.
Go ahead and set the NBV to something high like 1.60-1.65V.

---

Hi binormalkilla,

I tried those settings including BNV but it still won't post. At AUTO (800mhz) it will post but won't run for more than a few minutes in Memtest without errors. I tried the RAM in a friends P5E and it works perfectly. I am being to think my Maximus Formula is defective.

Thanks

has anyone got 8gb working correctly with this board? I have 8gb OCZ 4-4-4-15 800mhz stuff here but I get massive errors with 1,2,3, or 4 sticks in the board with all settings at stock.

Its obvious and more than disappointing that this board has many many RAM compatibility issues. This better be fixed soon or my return to ASUS will be short lived.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pee4

Hi binormalkilla,

I tried those settings including BNV but it still won't post. At AUTO (800mhz) it will post but won't run for more than a few minutes in Memtest without errors. I tried the RAM in a friends P5E and it works perfectly. I am being to think my Maximus Formula is defective.

Thanks

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sources

Its obvious and more than disappointing that this board has many many RAM compatibility issues. This better be fixed soon or my return to ASUS will be short lived.

---

Good news is the Chinese New Year is over so work can begin on a Bios Update. DETDRAM issue popped up again on me after I thought I had it beat. So I'm beginning to suspect the motherboard doesn't like GSkill...at all.

So i notice quite a few people run ram at 1:1, i set my ram in bios to 1066 and i have my cpu at 333x9 for 3ghz, when i go to cpu-z i notice my FSB : DRAM is at 5:8 is this wrong? should i be running it at 1:1?

Would appreciate advice please

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

I do recall its a 64bit Video driver issue ( but dont quote me on that ) there is a great deal of material on the subject but not 1 clear answer. Vista was buggy in the beginning with ATI drivers in particular and Nvidia but I thought this was all sorted out long ago. Update to the latest drivers if you have not already and maybe try SP1 RTM. It might be memory related but I never saw it referenced b4.

---

I'm going to try updatign the video driver and then maybe reinstall vista. I backed up my programs with Vista's PC backup restore image feature. We'll see how it works, but I suspect it's an instability issue due to BSOD from of failures.

i too am having MAJOR ram issues.

i have 3 kits of ram here 2x Gskill 6400 HZ and a brand new set of Crucial Ballistics 6400 (orange heatspreaders)

im lucky if i can run for 1/2 a day now without it starting to say my ram has errors

meaning i can get it all setup,, and for no fracking reason out of the blue i will run memtest and i get bombed by errors.

well t then takes another week for the fooker to stop giving me errors.
i might be ok for a day and get ZERO memtest errors then all the sudden i am back with errors again.


im sorry but all 3 kits are good then bad then good then bad...

this board is reeally starting to piss me off. i can't even get stable anymore, not even at fvcking stock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grnfinger

well I'm just an uneducated candian that can't really understand the full complexities of thermal tollerance so I will not comment any further.
BUT.... It was always my understanding that cooler was better, hence all the cooling options these days. But again I'm out of my league here , I'll just go sit in the corner now and read my picture book

---

i know some guys who are Qualcomm Engineers who are absolute retards. makes me wonder what tests they cheated on to get their ingineering degree(s)

so dont feel bad if someone tells you something to the contrary of what you know to be TRUE

cold = stability, longer life
heat = unstable and shorter life span

silicon i dont give a flying patooty where you got your education has a natural heat tolerance level and when your talking about cpu's chipset's gpu's they all start to choke around 70-80c. they wont die but they start going downhill .

you two keep argueing this is entertaining...

you guys im staring at the checkout page at ncix for an asus maximus formula, should i pull the trigger?

ive got my E6300 to 3.5 on my now dead (rip) evga 680i board, I only wanna take this sucker if I can do the same. I'll ghetto mod (and later pro mod) a 3cm fan (from old Athlon XP cooler) to sit on the north bridge. I'm running four 1066 rated Ballistix Tracers.

Also, what do you guys think about nehalem support on X38. Total crap shoot? Is there any board that stands the best chance at supporting next gen procs? this is the last mobo im probibly going to own for three or four years so it needs to last!

Well, I'm @ 500x7 on an E6400. Of course, every board will be different, but it's LAN party stable. :D Key for me was transaction booster to relaxed, 0. My previous board was the 680i...I'm quite a bit happier now.

It's a great board as long as you don't shut it down. I've been wrestling with DETDRAM on Cold Boot since I got this board but that's with GSkill 1066 HK.