Gigabyte EX58-UD5/Extreme Discussion Thread

[GAR]

Anyone know the change log for F4R???

[ReverendMaynard]

Anyone know the change log for F4R???

I'm guessing it's what was posted at TT.

Most problem is VT function, some guys can't run VMWARE when turn on VT
of i7, F4m is fixed this, also this bios improve some other oc and warning page
or multiplier reset when xmp work.

That was posted under the F4R and F4M update.

[beast200]

F4R seems ok
how running @201 x 20 plus tubo enable(21 x 200) Ht disable
change water block to ek supreme
got fedup waiting for d tek to produce 1355 mounting kit

temps ide 39 - 40

[ReverendMaynard]

F4R seems ok
how running @201 x 20 plus tubo enable Ht disable
change water block to ek supreme
got fedup waiting for d tek to produce 1355 mounting kit

temps ide 39 - 40

man these water cooling companies really the bed with the 1366 introduction.

I just ordered the GTZ and the bracket is $13 bones extra. Pitiful.

What are you're loads like? BobbyLite modified his dtek with the pro-mount and it works extremely well.

[rge]

You know you can type in the number instead of scrolling, right? Well, at least it worked with F4j.

4 weeks later, ?30 bios resets clearing cmos/bios trials ....no, I didn't know, thanks for telling me. Just tried it, works for VTT and other volts too...guess I should apologize to all GB bios writers for all the non-abridged dictionary words I thought about them while endlessly scrolling in their bios.

[Lukee]

4 weeks later, ?30 bios resets clearing cmos/bios trials ....no, I didn't know, thanks for telling me. Just tried it, works for VTT and other volts too...guess I should apologize to all GB bios writers for all the non-abridged dictionary words I thought about them while endlessly scrolling in their bios.

Hehe.. My old P45 board allowed entry. I was used to it and tried it when I first got this board. Yeah, the scrolling does suck.

[FuriousSalesman]

I'm guessing it's what was posted at TT.



That was posted under the F4R and F4M update.

I updated to F4R. I am running memtest right now for 12gb of ram at 1600mhz using a XMP profile. I seem to be having no problems like I did with the other bios.

[Xello]

Looks like i've finally run into this multiple-multi's problem some of you are having. I was trying to find my memory's max stable overclock, and i started with 206bclk x8 (1648) with 18x QPI (3708) and 16x unc (3296), which was stable.

I decided it would be easier to instead reduce bclk and use the 10x memory multi. This of course means using the 20x uncore multi, which is no problem however with the lower bclk. I went for 165bclk, giving 2970 QPI and 3300 unc. I could not get windows to boot

Running QPI below the uncore clock can't be a problem, because i have run 222bclk with uncore @ 17x and QPI in 'slow mode' which takes it right down to 100mhz~ range, and it was stable. The uncore clock on that setting was 3774, so with only 3300 on the setting above that can't be the problem either.

CPU is lowered all the way, QPI volts are high enough for higher stable clocks than this (previously tested), any suggestions?

[zlojack]

I had that same issue yesterday Xello, only worse, mine wouldn't even post when I did that.

[vega22]

I second the vdroop issue. I wish they would make vcore bios = vcore idle = vcore load.

This is a common mistake. Vcore bios=Vcore idle (Vdrop) is a good thing, ok. But Intel specification claiming that the Vcore idle is bigger than the load (Vdroop), for safe run of the chip. I seem to remember that AnandTech strongly discouraged in an article using loadlines in 45nm dual o quads cores, i.e. It´s an ideal exact amount of Vdroop, but not 0. Vdrop=0 is ok.
Already with my new EX58, with all his capacitors in his right place

[Xello]

I seem to remember that AnandTech strongly discouraged in an article using loadlines in 45nm dual o quads cores

With the loadline off i get nearly a whole .1v vdroop, it's not usable for any kind of decent OC

[vega22]

.1v vdroop is NOT a ideal amount
EDIT: ...or yes?

[rge]

This is a common mistake. Vcore bios=Vcore idle (Vdrop) is a good thing, ok. But Intel specification claiming that the Vcore idle is bigger than the load (Vdroop), for safe run of the chip. I seem to remember that AnandTech strongly discouraged in an article using loadlines in 45nm dual o quads cores, i.e. It´s an ideal exact amount of Vdroop, but not 0. Vdrop=0 is ok.
Already with my new EX58, with all his capacitors in his right place

Actually if you read the entire article, including the cartoonish waveforms which are proof of nothing, the whole point of even that article is overshoot volts. If I set bios to 1.4, and vdrop is to 1.35 idle, and vdroop is to 1.3v load, then providing mobo manufacturer followed intel specs, overshoot spikes are to 1.4 (bios setting) or .1v.

Now if I use loadline enabled, and set bios to 1.35 and idle is 1.33 and load is 1.3, the overshoot from same load is still going to be .1v or to 1.4v from 1.3. As long as you can do the simple math and not fool yourself into thinking the overshoots are not there...LLC by itself is not going to kill anything. But if you are using 1.5LLC vcore with overshoots to 1.65V thinking it is same as setting 1.5 bios without LLC, then you have a problem.

According to the anandtech article the above is correct in terms of overshoot volts. There conclusion based on 1 mobo, 1 older vrm circuit that volts were more erratic b/c overclock needed little more vcore, is not going to persuade me of anything. 50 mobos and take an average with 50-100K multi capable of accurately measuring waveforms and detecting slight volt differences, and we will talk. But even then, I can tell you on my mobo, LLC makes it easier not more difficult to OC, so I have different experience than them.

All of which is irrelevant anyways. Until real world experience shows me that vcore I am using with LLC enabled is harming my chips, I will continue to do so.

As an aside feeding a loaded chip less volts than unloaded is idiotic. It is simply cheaper to implement that piss poor strategy via circuitry than better much more expensive one of designing circuitry with less overshoot. But as long as I can add and subtract, I will be using LLC.

[ReverendMaynard]

Actually if you read the entire article, including the cartoonish waveforms which are proof of nothing, the whole point of even that article is overshoot volts. If I set bios to 1.4, and vdrop is to 1.35 idle, and vdroop is to 1.3v load, then providing mobo manufacturer followed intel specs, overshoot spikes are to 1.4 (bios setting) or .1v.

Now if I use loadline enabled, and set bios to 1.35 and idle is 1.33 and load is 1.3, the overshoot from same load is still going to be .1v or to 1.4v from 1.3. As long as you can do the simple math and not fool yourself into thinking the overshoots are not there...LLC by itself is not going to kill anything. But if you are using 1.5LLC vcore with overshoots to 1.65V thinking it is same as setting 1.5 bios without LLC, then you have a problem.

According to the anandtech article the above is correct in terms of overshoot volts. There conclusion based on 1 mobo, 1 older vrm circuit that volts were more erratic b/c overclock needed little more vcore, is not going to persuade me of anything. 50 mobos and take an average with 50-100K multi capable of accurately measuring waveforms and detecting slight volt differences, and we will talk. But even then, I can tell you on my mobo, LLC makes it easier not more difficult to OC, so I have different experience than them.

All of which is irrelevant anyways. Until real world experience shows me that vcore I am using with LLC enabled is harming my chips, I will continue to do so.

As an aside feeding a loaded chip less volts than unloaded is idiotic. It is simply cheaper to implement that piss poor strategy via circuitry than better much more expensive one of designing circuitry with less overshoot. But as long as I can add and subtract, I will be using LLC.

I like your style rge.

Cheers

[vega22]

From Intel Specifications for 775. Only to illustrate the chat:

[hicookie]

With the loadline off i get nearly a whole .1v vdroop, it's not usable for any kind of decent OC

for vdrooping is very painful for this motherboard. here is the pencil-mod
can fix vdrooping. hope this can help you to oc. i duno if someone already post this.

hicookie

vdrooping pencil-mod for GA-EX58 series.

[NightRaven]

i'm on f4r guys. flashed from f4f.

quite the same actually. performance wise.

wont post results till i max it. so far my chip is 5ghz 3dm06 but the score is a little low for my liking

[jcool]

Mh yeah, the Vcore does fluctuate a bit.. undervolting is quite annoying, Vdroop with LLC is quite ok.
Still too much if you come from a DFI that does bios=idle=load if you want it to.. or even better, works with EIST at any overclock so you actually get considerably lower idle Vcore. Hope they hurry the f up with the mobo.. my 965 is waiting :>

[Xello]

Can't believe i forgot about EIST, i'll be using that so i won't actually have to deal with the 1.47v at idle.

[stasio]

GA-EX58 series all(6) models:
GA-EX58-EXTREME
GA-EX58-UD5
GA-EX58-UD4P
GA-EX58-UD4
GA-EX58-UD3R
GA-EX58-DS4

[jcool]

Can't believe i forgot about EIST, i'll be using that so i won't actually have to deal with the 1.47v at idle.

Well EIST doesn't work when you set Vcore manually. Only DFI and Abit can/could do it.. no Asus no Gigabyte. They will never learn I fear...

[dinos22]

for vdrooping is very painful for this motherboard. here is the pencil-mod
can fix vdrooping. hope this can help you to oc. i duno if someone already post this.

hicookie

vdrooping pencil-mod for GA-EX58 series.

nice shot
did you take it eek

[dinos22]

hmmmm

just testing the i7 965 chip in my UD5 on F4f and the RAM seems to clock a bit higher than with 920

just trying to get 1100MHz 8-9-8-20-1T stable atm

[nah still no good will try the new bios] 1080 Max so far

[Kimi.Rk]

There is very much confusion with the bios some gigabyte ex58 extreme! But the good one is the 4l or the 4m? Thanks! Excuse my English.

[Xello]

Well EIST doesn't work when you set Vcore manually. Only DFI and Abit can/could do it.. no Asus no Gigabyte. They will never learn I fear...

Huh? It was working fine at stock before i started tweaking i'm sure.. Will test later.