** OFFICIAL ** Intel DX38BT & DX48BT2 BoneTrail Thread

Soccergeek, thanks for the props...mostly they have developed through experience while trying to explain difficult or foreign concepts to my friends and family. My educational background is in the biological sciences, and many people that ask me related questions often doesnt understand how complex the explanations behind a simple thing can be, nor do they often (if ever) used that part of their brain and so then the struggle to relate it to something they can grasp ensues.

My wife is particularly guilty of this and has aided tremedously in the fine-tuning of my analogy skills!

sean

SGeek, Sean really is the analogy man. He has shown that in several occasions.
For me this board was like love at first sight. Simple yet beautiful as hell. No heatpipes and bright colors like some other manufacturers out there.
For me it was the no legacy finally that convinced me. Still, the Marvell controller could be gone, although for some the extra ports might come handy of course. If FiewWire was on PCI Express instead of regular PCI better yet, but no more lanes.
Another thing Intel might have changed would be the capacitors used, I'd prefer the Japanese solid caps, only because the electrolytic ones can spill, happened before. The longer lifespan is really a marketing trick, your board will probably not last that long in your hands anyway. Regarding power consumption, really can't tell if it's really that better.
I have a problem also with the placement of the front panel connectors, my 900 cables are not long enough, they're too far off.
Another issue is the power loss issue but that's something they should have fixed long ago.
Maybe the audio was not the best option, although I find it good enough, but the driver updates from IDT (or maybe Intel doesn't provide them) are almost not existent.
Other than that... great board.

Also, Intel could have provided the 40mm fan for the NB.
The 4 mem slot at 1600 issue is, I believe, an XMP issue, not this particular board I guess. Not sure if other manufacturers support 1600 in all 4 slots.
Sound drivers are horrible, just lost the ability to select 5.1 setup in the drivers. Also, DD never worked. Crappy drivers, look horrible too.
Speaking of sound, still couldn't figure out what sound coded the DX58SO uses, I've seen the same IDT but also Realtek.
Intel has some problems with providing the correct information.

Intel changed their website, downloads page at least...
Nothing new though!
IDCC even for DX58SO sees no updates latelly, I guess Matt's prediction for final version for late Q1 is coming closer to a no go. That means that our final version will not be coming soon, if ever. I guess we're stuck with a beta version that doesn't even work with the latest BIOS.
From what I understood from Matt's email, they would be unifying all versions for X38/X48/X58, not sure though. Auto-tuning for us also sounds good!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manel

Also, Intel could have provided the 40mm fan for the NB.
Not sure if other manufacturers support 1600 in all 4 slots.
Sound drivers are horrible, just lost the ability to select 5.1 setup in the drivers.

---

Manel, I agree with the fan setup. I know of at least one board that has 4 1600 MHz fsb mem dimms. But it cost $400!

I have never been able to get my surround sound to work. I always just figured it was my speaker system (it's from 2001) going bad. After reading your post, I check it out and they still work on my laptop (supports 5.1, SPDIF, and optical). Then I went back to my PC, ran the sound setup, the TEST part worked fine, but playing music (itunes and winamp) and movies (PowerDVD) didn't play the Surround Sound. So yeah, my sound driver isn't working properly either.

Also, is anyone running their processor with the stock heat-sink and fan? If I'm not going to be over-clocking for a while, is it be worth getting a bigger heat dissappation setup?

SoccerGeek, the general concensus is that "cooler running processors last longer," but if you aren't adding additional voltage even if you are mildly overclocking, you aren't going to be increasing the heat generated by much and the stock fan should be fine. If you plan to continue running at stock or on a mild (no voltage increase) OC, the stock fan should keep the processor running for much longer than you will want to keep it. Also, the stock fans tend to be significantly quieter than the aftermarket ones, and some of the aftermarket ones do not have the 4-pin connector and cannot be easily controlled via the mobo or software.

Sean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sean-E-Boy

If you plan to continue running at stock or on a mild (no voltage increase) OC, the stock fan should keep the processor running for much longer than you will want to keep it.

---

The reason I ask about cooling is I haven't been able to get an honest temp reading while gaming. I know playing a game, like Supreme Commander or Crysis, I am using at least 90% of core 1 and anywhere from 50% to 80% on core 2...but when I try to get a capture of the temp for the processor, I get figures that are all over the charts.

I usually play for an hour or two at a time. It's very rare that I would play for longer (usually because my wife will kick me off the computer kinda like this = :slap: ). Once, the temp read was at 39ºC...the next time it was 58ºC (that's a pretty drastic difference). I DID use artic silver when mounting the stock heat sink and fan.

In the BIOS it seems idle right at 30ºC (slightly warmer than room temperature).

And you're right, I only plan on keep this processor until 1.) Extreme Processors come down in price, or 2.) More programs take advantage of quad-core processors.

Not sure what happened to my post?? I am still having issues OCing my board. It is like the bios settings don't take affect when I enter windows. I use CPUZ and it tells me my processor is running at 2.83 under load....even though I have the bios set to 3.5........I have the C1E disabled and watchdog off.......I've done everything I can think of to try and make this work.....I'm beginning to think my board is crap. I ran into similar issues with a e8400 processor, I couldn't get it over 3.2 Ghz.

Right now I'm trying to use a q9550. I really am at a loss for words.

I thought maybe the memory was to blame so I ordered some crucial Ballistix memory 10600 and let the bios detect its settings and its fine. I never have reboots now which is a good sign. The only issue is that it just won't OC. There has to be some critical step I'm missing. This is the first board I've ever tried to OC.

Oh, on a side note, I did get it to OC to 3.5 using the IDCC.......one time.......ever since then when I reboot the IDCC fails to run. Some error message about some other program tuning my machine.........which there isnt.......

I'm really getting frustrated here.

My current build is:

DX48BT2
Q9550 2.83
2x2 crucial ballistix 10600
HD 3870 x 2

running vista 64.........

help.

BTW, i read first 20 posts of this thread and pulled out some of useful tips, than tired and went to page, where GTJ bought his DX48BT2 one, then read a couple of pages from the end.
Main problem of the thread, that in the past it was considering more on problems of particular folks, more of which were released when new version of BIOS had come.
It's simply to say, but it's nothing good for newcomers than reading this thread from first till end, but it's would have been better to has an Wiki pages or just well documented guide with tips made actually for last BIOS versions.


Sean-E-Boy, thanks, i'll prefer reduced size and better OC potential, but i'm interesting though what speed
were achieved with 4x2Gb quads?

Thinking of what HW parts 'll be next.
The memory is still the question, the tw3x4g1800c8df that Sean-E-Boy has is overpriced and GTJ is currently uses only 2GB of RAM.
Any conclusion on checked decision of 2x2Gb pair?

WOW! we lost a TON of stuff. unfortunate, but not a total loss.

First things first:

From Matt @ Intel
Hi,

You are receiving this email because you sent a request to idccfeedback@intel.com requesting information on the Intel Desktop Control Center (IDCC) availability for the Intel Desktop Board DX38BT or DX48BT2. If you no longer wish to receive email updates on this product, please reply with UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line.

As you know, the IDCC beta version v4.1.0.168 has been available for over a year, but it has some limitations. Due to architecture changes in the underlying Extreme Tuning Utility (XTU) Service (upon which, IDCC relies), this version of IDCC is only compatible with BIOS version 1814 or older. We have been very slowly working our way toward a new version of XTU, IDCC, and BIOS that are compatible with one another. We are now down to one critical show-stopper issue in XTU. While it's only one bug, it's difficult to resolve and I don't know how long it will take. We are working on it and will get a new version of IDCC posted as soon as we get this issue resolved.

We will get IDCC released for your motherboard as soon as possible. Thanks for your continuing patience.

--MATT

Matt Alford | Software Product Manager| Intel Corporation

would I be better off just selling this board and getting an easier board to OC ?? I bought this thinking it made alot of sense with a intel processor and that the OCing would therefore be easier, because I'm a noob at this......

Second,
Moto, most likely you are experiencing problems related to your memory...now i am not saying your memory itself, but there are some things to try:

1) make sure that you memory dimms are installed in the BLACK slots. I know the manual says blue, but just imagine you didnt read it.

2) if they aleady are in the black slots, or if that didnt help, you should loosen the timings on your memory. I experience the same issues--have system set to 4+Ghz and while fiddling with memory timings all of the sudden the system boots to 2.85 (stock) and all of the memory settings are at defaults too. so, go into the BIOS and to the memory settings page and increase the first 3 numbers by 1. save and reboot and see if you are still having issues.

3) if #2 didnt help, adjust the reference frequency and the mem frequency to something that results in a slower memory speed as seen in the first screen of the BIOS. I am going to guess that you are trying to keep the memory at 1:2, ie resulting memory frequency as seen in CPU-Z equal to the FSB seen in CPU-Z. if so, you are trying to run your memory at 1647 MHz. while this is possible with this board, the additional confounding factors of an 8.5 multi and a quad core processor simply overload the MCH. Usually, however, trying to run the memory too fast will result in crashes at the desired speed, whereas the system booting to the stock settings is a problem with memory timings being too tight and the MCH being unable to keep up.

4) now pc-10600 memory is "designed" to run at or below 1333 Mhz, i am not sure what the overclockability of the memory you have is, but i am going to doubt that they can run much faster than 1550 Mhz let alone 1600+. but do not let this bother you...while fast memory speeds are great for things like transncoding a 6gb movie where huge chunks of data are tossed around, most other things you do will not be affected.

now, my end suggestion is this:
find the settings recommended for your memory as well as the voltage required and write down. you can usually find this on the memory itself.

while you are there, make sure that they are in the BLACK slots only.

reboot, go into BIOS to memory, choose manual, set the mem ref to 400 and the memory speed to 1333, set the timings to those on the memory. they will usually give you something like 7-7-7-24 1T, the first 4 are the first 4 listed from top down, the last (1T) can be set in the "command rate" field. now set your memory voltage to what is listed on the memory...be sure to set it 1 option higher than the closest or actual match (dont worry about why).

save, reboot (system may freeze upon reboot, this unfortunately is normal with this board. just shut down manually with power button and boot up again...may have to do this 2-3 times) and you should be working fine.

if not fine, let me know.

sean

dont give up, everyone is a noob once

can anybody help me? i am running a DX38BT-Q9300-OCZ Extreme Edition (2X2GB) and i cant get my settings right. if anybody is running this same setup could they post their settings for me. here are my current settings

vcore default
Vfsb 1.3
mult 7
Vmch 1.425
1333/default 7-7-7-20-19-1.74v

when i do a restart it begins to boot and then shuts down then starts up again completing the boot.

caneymud, does it do that every time or only after changing something in the BIOS?

everytime

dukzcry, the speed that you can achieve with all four dimms populated depends on a couple things.

probably the most important has to do with what processor your are using (i see that you are talking about quads) as in the specific model, and what its highest multi is--or at least the highest you plan on using.

with the quads, the MCH has to handle much more I/O than with dual core processors, and because of this added overhead it simply cannot keep up beyond a certain point.

also you have to consider that there are slight differences in the quality of MCH from board to board. for example, the x48 is simply a higher binned version of the x38. essentially all this means is that is is the exact same as the x38, but it just so happens that it is capable of "better performance" than the average x38, according to sources interviewing Intel folk.

as for how fast you can run 4 dimms with quads, my answer is going to have to be that it varies. For example, i used to have a Q6700 (1066 fsb) with 4x1gb super fast capable ram, but i could never get it 100% stable above 1580 or so with the 10x multi. now that was before i learned how to adjust GTL refs and voltages appropriately so maybe i could have got it stable at 1600 or 1610....but there is only so much tweaking you can do for stability when the processor is running flat out and everything is close to its max.

now i have a q9550 (1333 fsb 8.5x multi) and with those original 4x1 dimms i ran into similar issues at like 1602 MHz for the RAM, which was frustrating because going from 333 core clock to 400 is hardly an overclock, in my opinion. so i ditched the 4dimms and went for 2x2gb and it made a huge difference.

with 2x2g and an understanding of GTL Refs and how vFSB, and vCore, affect stability, especially with MCH and high memory speeds, i was able to reach and run a few tests (not fully stable, but pretty good) at 1840 MHz with a max stable @ 8.5 multi somewhere around 1760-1780.

now the other issue at hand is this:
i know that you are thinking about 8gb of RAM, but why? unless you are transcoding a movie with something like Premiere Pro, while at the same time working on some super complex 3d CAD thing all while having 20 tabs of IE8 open with Java on them and playing Crysis, you DO NOT need that much RAM.

Its like having Z-rated pirelli tires on your Yugo...sure they can handle speeds over 180 Mph wihtout flying apart and are so sticky that the car will hold on a 60 degree angle, BUT ITS A YUGO! Bicycle tires would provide more performance than the car could handle...

a good exercise is to open the things that you commonly do at one time or even the most that you could feasibly do at once and simply look at the windows task manager. If you have less than 10-12% free memory, then yes, more ram would be helpful, otherwise adding RAM is a waste of money. Its like having a Yacht on a 10 Acre lake....or a 7 bedroom house and youre single with no kids, no pets, no friends who stay over, and you sleep on the couch.

If youre looking for a faster system, and you already have a quad, and you are already overclocking, and you have a good graphics card (if youre a gamer) the next best place to put your money is in hard drives. they are the true bottleneck in today's computers. throw some money at some good overall performing SSDs or buy 6 raptors...2 in raid 0 for your OS and 4 in raid 0 for your games or movies or such.

sean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caneymud

everytime

---

first off, make sure that if using 2 memory dimms that they are in the BLACK slots only, not the blue ones.

second, dont set any memory settings to default or auto...this will only screw you.

set your ram to 333 1333 command rate 2T

if this works, try command rate 1T.

if none of this helps, tell us more about your setup...is the processor at stock or overclocked, if overclocked, what is the host clock and the multi.
what is the wattage of your powersupply? how many video cards and hard drives, etc?

here are my memory settings
333-1333-7-7-7-20-19-6-8-5-6 1.74v 2T

after changing settings it tried to start 4 times and finally got to windows logo and crashed. started again went down one more time and back up and windows started. i will post back in a few to let you know how it goes on multiple restarts. i am running 2X500gb 7200rpm hd in raid 0. one nvidia card with 1gb ram on it, 750w zalman PSU, thanks for the help i wil post back with my fsb and processor settings.

I'm gonna try to overclock the i7920 with DX58SO once I get home. Hoping for decent results!

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/553...rd02xvzphb.jpg
Sweet results for a DX58SO. I've updated to the latest bios and overclocked it to 3.6ghz with stock voltage! Temperature never went past 55c with IBP-Z001 cooler (dualfans mod) + Noctua thermal paste.
Only problem I had was slow bootup and instability when trying to go over1600 RAM speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sean-E-Boy

dukzcry, the speed that you can achieve with all four dimms populated depends on a couple things.
...
sean

---

Thank you for such exhaustive post.
The see-pee-you in question is a q9550 w e0 stepping, with locked multiplier, so memory with good OC potential will be best offer.

It was the memory host frequency that was stopping me. And I tried to put the memory in the black slots and it won't boot at all......odd

Now my dilemma is heat......

I got it to OC to 3.78 GHZ giving me a 19,000 on 3dmark (stoked)

The issue I have is I ran real temp and monitored it under load and I just about hit TJ MAX......it hit 98 and I stopped the test....went back to bios and dropped the voltage. Now I still get hot but not like that. idle its around 50.....thats way too hot...I'm thinking my cooling fan is crap...it isn't very loud and the RPMs won't even break 2000.......I gotta do something about that.....

Any suggestions??

Moto,

DAMN THATS HOT! What were you using to monitor temps? You mentioned IDCC earlier, are you using that for fan control?

So I take it that youre on the stock CPU fan? If so, i suggest that you:

1) Write down all the values that are on the CPU page in BIOS.
2) Set vCore, multi, and host clock to stock values, make sure that enhanced power slope is Enabled and that the other power option to increase the voltage by xxx is disabled
3) save, reboot, re-enter BIOS
4) go back to the cpu page in BIOS and look at the bottom where it says what the current vCore is, now manually set the vCore to that value.
5) save, reboot, load into windows.
6) come back here and post the values from step 1, the default vCore value, and what temp monitoring program you are using.
7) download http://www.ultimate-filez.com/files/IntelBurnTest.zip
8) open the zip file and extract the LinData folder and the IntelBurn Test.exe to your desktop.

this program is the most intensive stress testing software that I have found and it produces TONS of heat as well as good confirmation of stability.

9) while having a temp monitoring program running and nothing else, double-click IntelBurn Test.exe
10) type N, <enter>
11) type 1, <enter>
12) type at least 5 (higher is better, like 10 or 15, but for the sake of time start with 5)
13) wait and monitor temps.
14) if test completed without crashing computer or freezing (each run of the test takes up to 2 mins, so be patient) make sure that all the numbers in the far right column are the same (see attached). If they are not, then you have stability issues (probably the ram) but you shouldnt run into this for a little while.
15) if everything went ok, restart computer, go back to BIOS and without adjusting Vcore, increase host clock by 20 or so.
16) save, exit, repeat tests, repeat increase if all ok.
17) once you run into stability issues while runing test, increase vCore by 1 step. keep doing this until you reach a stable point where you are satisfied with temps. I would say dont let the CPU get over 80C, others will tell you lower, so I will leave the final decision up to you.

If after all this you are not happy with your OC, and i imagine you wont be, save up some money and get this:
http://www.amazon.com/Swiftech-H20-2...0503171&sr=8-4

it takes some time to install, and you need to be sure that your case is big enough, but itll keep your stuff cool and it has enough capacity to add an MCH water block. For example, my Q9500 @ 4.124 Ghz or 8.5 x485 and 1.55 vCore doesnt get above 82 with the IntelBurnTest.

You can read more about the package here:
http://www.swiftnets.com/

Well, sorry that there is no image for you to see....for whatever reason, we have lost the ability to upload pics from file, AND linking to URL doesnt work either...sigh

you can see it here, though:

http://fourpawhikes.com/images/IntelBurnTest.JPG

Been away for a while but it seems we lost some posts around here.
Sean, received the exact same info from Matt @ Intel. Maybe we're close on the final version od IDCC after all, if they can solve the XTU issue that is. I understand they are still working on a new BIOS version as well, maybe this is the one we all have been waiting for!!!
Caney, I believe you have a low vMem issue, yoou mention OCZ Extreme mem, I believe it's the Intel Extreme series. I'm on the Plats and they require 1.8V, although I'm actually running them at 1.78V. Maybe you can try a higher voltage, just 1 or 2 notches, the OCZs usually require around 1.8V, not the newer ones for triple channel though at only 1.65V as "required" by the i7 (not exactly but hey...). Anyway, I was cheking out OCZ site and it needs 1.75V @ 1333 or 1.8V @ 1600. Maybe this is the issue. Try it.

I'm still also using the stock fan and my temps are miserable, might have to re-apply paste and/or use a new cooler. I like the Extreme series ones but they're too loud I hear and you can't buy them separate anyway.

From my experience, if you are overclocking either the fans will be noisy or they simply wont cool well enough.

Prior to my H2O setup, i was using a Zalman CNPS9700 NT type fan (not sure if the model is exact) and while quiet at idle, it would make some pretty good noise at full tilt. With the H2O, i can set the fans to one of 3 levels by changing the connector and restricting the volts, but i am running it full out now since under load my cpu can get around 80C.

the noise isnt particularly annoying...sounds like mid 1990s gateway...and while it is a bit louder than the zalman at idle, it is much quieter and more effective at load...plus i have a cooler on the MCH, which is nice. Before, i had a little 40mm or whatever fan on it and that alone was louder than my zalman and the 2900xt fan together.

maybe one day someone will figure out how to make some liquid in which the entire board can be submerged without shorting and a few "fans" that direct the flow across the cpu and other parts.

as far as IDCC goes, i really dont care anymore. would be nice to tweak from windows, but it can just as easily do it from the BIOS and i no longer have any need for fan control.