As far as I can understand, it's the same principle like this: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=166334
Printable View
As far as I can understand, it's the same principle like this: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=166334
Whatever it is there is no easy fix.....I tend to think its a combination.....
Anyway my bios will be up for release in the near future......I put the final touches on it today.......everything seems to be working across OS's ( although I have not tested 64 bit ), I had one person test it out on non ref and no luck....so ref based only.......
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/qdig-file...y/lrg_bios.jpg
The above screenshot really doesn't address all issues.......however some of you may have run vantage in multicard.....with software the screen flickers at load.....scores don't seem to be on par etc etc......I found multicard brings out the worst in these cards, especially quadfire.....cards don't appear to run in sync, and you may have noticed taking a hit clock wise in multi card versus what the cards can do individually.
These issues are fixed. Other issues will be adressed later if physically possible. Final rev will have a core clock limit of 1065 until the issue is 100% truly fixed.
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/qdig-file...g_bios%202.jpg
Somone Pme'd me.......asking what this actully fixes and posted a screenshot for me....
I do not think words are necessary.......
His run.....1050/1150 with a hell of a lot higher cpu score.
http://loppmarknader.se/blossas_albu...1/06_33455.png
My run 1000/1150
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/qdig-file...20asus%202.jpg
My run 1050/1150
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/qdig-file...ire%20asus.jpg
So you think your BIOS is the reason for the better results with lower CPU score?
very interesting :)
NO I know for a fact there were performace issues ;) I have screens of my own prior to this bios depicting the same results......poor performance per clock via software. software is battling the bios.....
I believe the best way to describe it is the cards are jumping from 3d to 2d mode but actually not the case. More so they are jumping back and forth from bios clocks to software clocks.....
Canyon is more so an indicator of this than cpu score, I just chose to use that result as an example......how about an AMD result?
Note canyon...http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...33&postcount=1
Let me add this seems to a ref card issue. This isn't a mircale fix, just "a" fix for ref card owners.
hmm - you got my attention:yepp: I'm ready to flash :moon: :wasntme:
Your fix notwithstanding, the scores you're showing don't have any relevance.
First of all, 33.5k is a very good score for 4875MHz on a Nehalem.
Second, at that level 06 is completely CPU bottlenecked. It is even for you as your own screenies show. Margin of error difference between 1000 and 1050.
You're comparing two wildly different setups in a completely CPU-bound test. The GPU's have nothing to do with this. On a Nehalem at that speed you'd barely lose anything even if you were to switch to two 4870X2's, or were to bring the 4890's back down to stock.
compare the amd system gautam post 186 ;)
Or just ask vince about austin.....scores weren't what they should have been which led me to investigate this in the first place.
Doesn't really matter to me if you think this works or not, I have my own results here and have been compiling results for a few months now.
FYI margin of error is in my 1000/1050 results favor due to cpu score.
Yes that guy has an exceptionally poor canyon, no doubt about that. It's certainly not normal.
I wasn't speaking to whether your fix works or not, as I said right off the bat, simply that your presentation was flawed.
So release your BIOS and we'll test it. The differences you're seeing between those two runs could be caused by several factors including 32bit vs. 64 bit.
with chew at least he's offering up the "fix" once done which what i have always thought xs was all about sharing info, no offence to sf3d he's always been good on his postings but to say 4890 oc limit fixed then say i have the fix but not allowed to share it , personally i'd rather not see the post unless it has the fix included , it seems everythings nda nowadays , nobody bothered in the old days (when i say that i mean when the core2 duo es's were first emerging) and people just posted away, its all getting a bit corporate nowadays, sorry for the rant and as said no slur on sf3d at all he's ok in my book , looking forward to the bios chew what exactly have you addressed to fix it
thanks
I'd still like to give your BIOS a try, I've never had a problem clocking single 4890 past 1200/1200...maybe I just got lucky picking clocks.
What it namely adresses is it eliminates the need for software with ref cards that may not work correctly in multicard .cfgs. mostly for 1000+ core to 1065 limit.
It appears 100 % bug free even in quadfire other than the fact that ATI drivers need work for quadfire, min fps = higher, max fps = lower in 4 cards .cfgs versus 3 card.
I personally had no issues with software in single card configurations.
cheers chew thanks for the info and look forward to your progress