ASUS P5K Deluxe - Intel P35 Bearlake + E6600 B1 / Q6600 B3

[lucas81]

Okay, can someone here tell me how long does it take ASUS to move from Beta to stable when it comes to their BIOS updates. Its been a month now and the 05xx BIOS is still in Beta. Is this normal? I haven't had an ASUS board since their AM2 CROSSHAIR 590 chipset, since then I have owned a DFI and EVGA and neither of them had such a long Beta stage for their BIOS's. Any idea?

I just checked the asus support page for a bios update for my gf's computer. The beta 1302 was from 2006/06/19, the 1303 final is from 2007/07/13. This is for the A8n-sli premium board by the way. It's an old one, but still.
Asus initially releases a lots of different bios, enhancing and optimizing performance. But when the mainstream settles for a good bios, even the beta won't go final. At least that's what I'm thinking. They have too many boards released recently..I guess they focus their resources where the money is...

[synergy]

Well 0501 beta bios for p5k deluxe sucks!

* It locks up during BIOS POST when you boot with various USB peripherals
attached e.g motherboard -> USB hub -> bunch of USB peripherals including
downstream hubs, keyboard, mouse, etc.

* It doesn't properly indicate memory it reserves and maps for
things like ACPI and peripherals is reserved so the OS can't use it,
so you get errors and ACPI failures and errors form LINUX saying
there is a BIOS bug that doesn't reserve the e840 region or
something to that effect.

* It obviously is screwing up ACPI because LINUX says the BIOS
isn't reporting power management capabilities for the Q6600 even
thouch ACPI, APM, SpeedStep, C1E, et.al. are all enabled in the BIOS.

etc etc.

How freaking hard is it to make a BIOS that works these days when you've
had what 20 years to practice getting it right over several dozens
of similar BIOS versions for similar chipsets?

I just checked the asus support page for a bios update for my gf's computer. The beta 1302 was from 2006/06/19, the 1303 final is from 2007/07/13. This is for the A8n-sli premium board by the way. It's an old one, but still
Asus initially releases a lots of different bios, enhancing and optimizing performance. But when the mainstream settles for a good bios, even the beta won't go final. At least that's what I'm thinking. They have too many boards released recently..I guess they focus their resources where the money is...

[Leeghoofd]

Flash only beta's at your own risk, and give feedback...listing all your hardware could be nice and not just say on your rig it sucks doesn't help others ...

There can be issues on some combination of hardware, that's why they are beta's and some don't even make it into a final release, some are even withdrawn hours after release as they seem to bork some mobo's,....

And due to the abundance of hardware floating around it's kinda hard to release one bios that supports all...

Also the rule of thumb is : If it ain't broke don't fix it !!! so only flash if you really need it !!

It's at your own risk to flash and use a beta, some are good, some suck , some kill boards, some make your rig fly... only way to find out is to give them a try or let others do it for you... but you know you are taking a risk !!! If it ian't good flash back to the workign one... and share ya findings with the engineers.... and us....

[safan80]

Well 0501 beta bios for p5k deluxe sucks!

* It locks up during BIOS POST when you boot with various USB peripherals
attached e.g motherboard -> USB hub -> bunch of USB peripherals including
downstream hubs, keyboard, mouse, etc.

It obviously is screwing up ACPI because LINUX says the BIOS
isn't reporting power management capabilities for the Q6600 even
thouch ACPI, APM, SpeedStep, C1E, et.al. are all enabled in the BIOS.

no usb problems here I have two hubs, 2 mice, keyboard, usb drink cooler, SD/CF card reader, and an ipod. as for your ACPI troubles enable ACPI 2.0 in the power section of the bios. I get no such errors with several Linux install CDs. I don't have speedstep or C1e enabled. you might need to get a newer kernel and compile your kernel because it sounds to me like your running an old kernel.

[chessman]

QX6700 @ 3977 MHz @ P5K Deluxe
no 4.0 GHz so far !

[newls1]

I'm going to ask this question again, could someone please respond: I'm currently using BIOS 311 with my Q6600 G0 processor, however according to asus's website, BIOS 311 isn't compatable with this stepping and I MUST use 404 or newer. I find 311 to be an xtremely good OCing BIOS and I really have no issues with this BIOS so I was trying to aviod flashing to any of those newer BIOSes. Everything seems great with this 311 BIOS, chip is recognized perfectly on POST, It OC's like a dream, etc..... So why does asus say I (we) need to run BIOS 404 or newer with the chip? Forgot to mention that I am using a P5K-DLX motherboard

[[XC] riptide]

Chessman... what vcore for that run? Thanks.

[chessman]

Chessman... what vcore for that run? Thanks.

(8x489)@1.5250 and SetFSB up to 497 MHz

[chessman]

I'm going to ask this question again, could someone please respond: I'm currently using BIOS 311 with my Q6600 G0 processor, however according to asus's website, BIOS 311 isn't compatable with this stepping and I MUST use 404 or newer. I find 311 to be an xtremely good OCing BIOS and I really have no issues with this BIOS so I was trying to aviod flashing to any of those newer BIOSes. Everything seems great with this 311 BIOS, chip is recognized perfectly on POST, It OC's like a dream, etc..... So why does asus say I (we) need to run BIOS 404 or newer with the chip? Forgot to mention that I am using a P5K-DLX motherboard

Very strange issue !
I read that eva2000 insist to 311 bios !

[newls1]

Very strange issue !
I read that eva2000 insist to 311 bios !

strange indeed Maybe Asus did include support for the G0 stepping in the 311 BIOS, but didn't realize it

[eva2000]

I'm going to ask this question again, could someone please respond: I'm currently using BIOS 311 with my Q6600 G0 processor, however according to asus's website, BIOS 311 isn't compatable with this stepping and I MUST use 404 or newer. I find 311 to be an xtremely good OCing BIOS and I really have no issues with this BIOS so I was trying to aviod flashing to any of those newer BIOSes. Everything seems great with this 311 BIOS, chip is recognized perfectly on POST, It OC's like a dream, etc..... So why does asus say I (we) need to run BIOS 404 or newer with the chip? Forgot to mention that I am using a P5K-DLX motherboard

no idea why they insist on it... maybe at auto subtimings it provides general end users better performance due to tighter timings http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=4161 or not all G0 steppings are supported only some.. ??

Just use what works for you

[chessman]

no idea why they insist on it... maybe at auto subtimings it provides general end users better performance due to tighter timings http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=4161 or not all G0 steppings are supported only some.. ??
Just use what works for you

Very useful info there.... Thanks eva2000 !

[xgman]

I'm going to ask this question again, could someone please respond: I'm currently using BIOS 311 with my Q6600 G0 processor, however according to asus's website, BIOS 311 isn't compatable with this stepping and I MUST use 404 or newer. I find 311 to be an xtremely good OCing BIOS and I really have no issues with this BIOS so I was trying to aviod flashing to any of those newer BIOSes. Everything seems great with this 311 BIOS, chip is recognized perfectly on POST, It OC's like a dream, etc..... So why does asus say I (we) need to run BIOS 404 or newer with the chip? Forgot to mention that I am using a P5K-DLX motherboard

It your happy with it leave well enough alone.

[xgman]

Well 0501 beta bios for p5k deluxe sucks!

* It locks up during BIOS POST when you boot with various USB peripherals
attached e.g motherboard -> USB hub -> bunch of USB peripherals including
downstream hubs, keyboard, mouse, etc.

* It doesn't properly indicate memory it reserves and maps for
things like ACPI and peripherals is reserved so the OS can't use it,
so you get errors and ACPI failures and errors form LINUX saying
there is a BIOS bug that doesn't reserve the e840 region or
something to that effect.

* It obviously is screwing up ACPI because LINUX says the BIOS
isn't reporting power management capabilities for the Q6600 even
thouch ACPI, APM, SpeedStep, C1E, et.al. are all enabled in the BIOS.

etc etc.

How freaking hard is it to make a BIOS that works these days when you've
had what 20 years to practice getting it right over several dozens
of similar BIOS versions for similar chipsets?

I had some of these sort of usb issues with earlier P5K dlx bioses. I don't think it has much to do with the bios version at all actually.

[newls1]

no idea why they insist on it... maybe at auto subtimings it provides general end users better performance due to tighter timings http://i4memory.com/showthread.php?t=4161 or not all G0 steppings are supported only some.. ??

Just use what works for you

Thanks Do you by chance use the 311 BIOS for your quads?

[newls1]

K, I did some more research on Asus's website and for a fact, some G0 chips were coded into that BIOS, but just not the Q6600 (unless they forgot to mention it) Cause it seems to work great here!

[eva2000]

Yes i did but my Q6600 ES was B3 not G0.

I'm no longer on Asus P5K Deluxe moved to Asus Blitz Formula/Extreme testing right now - threads coming later

On Blitz Formula @8x450FSB 4:5

[sofarfrome]

Well 0501 beta bios for p5k deluxe sucks!

I have it on 2 boards with usb devices connected and no problems so far.

[feanorAZ]

No problems with USB here either!

[1badhabit]

I'm using the 311 Bios on my P5K Dlx Q6600 G0, no issues here, works good for me, except for the mem dumps when the overclock isn't stable. Is that suppose to happen?

[synergy]

Yes, I understand that some people have it working in their setups, and
I've seen a couple of people indicating they've had similar problems
as I do with respect to USB devices locking up the BIOS boot phase.

ASUS seems to have no very attentively monitored way to submit
technical bug reports about their BIOS (general technical support = useless
as far as I can tell). Their web forums are (to me) beyond uselessly
screwed up -- 99.9% of the time I get an error page whenever I try to
access their 'product support' forum pages more than a hand full of times:

Due to vast number of connections online, the page that you requested cannot be displayed properly. Please re-connect using any of the following URL. Sorry for the inconvenience.

I didn't mean to imply these bugs were exclusicvely
P5K Deluxe + WiFi 0501 Beta BIOS version problems, it's just that
this is all that I've personally experienced / used -- it would surprise me
if they weren't also present in all other preceding versions of their BIOS.

My motherboard came with 0202 BIOS and that didn't support the Q6600 G0
stepping according to the ASUS CPU SUPPORT table and according to
an error message in the BIOS, so I had to reflash to *something* and,
it being a new motherboard model, I picked the latest assuming it'd
probably be the "latest and greatest" and in some way(s) better than
the preceding versions it was meant to replace. I know sometimes there
are new and regression bugs that may make an older BIOS a better choice,
but lacking any information to the contrary, 0501 Beta is the only one I've
tried so far.

This is my current USB configuration, and it 'locks up' the BIOS POST
process 100% of the time whenever the switched USB chain is plugged in
while the BIOS POST is in control. I've never waited for more than a couple
of minutes to see if it'd eventually do something different, but to givel all
keyboard stimuli and available visual cues it seemed to just be locked up.

Motherboard USB Port A
-> SanDisk Corp. SDCZ2 Cruzer Mini Flash Drive (thin)

Motherboard USB Port B
*********** -> USB switch
****************** -> Keyspan USB 1.1 5-port HUB A -- AC powered and AC power connected.
********************* -> Link to Keyspan USB 1.1 5-port HUB B -- Physically Disconnected
********************* -> Microsoft Corp. Internet Keyboard Pro with built in 2 port USB hub (empty).
********************* -> Creative Technology, Ltd Fatality 1010 mouse
********************* -> DELL 2405 LCD Monitor with built in USB 1.x hub, and memory card reader.
*************************** -> Microsoft Corp. Wireless Intellimouse Explorer 2.0
*************************** -> Canon PIXMA IP 2000 printer

So that's one external hub branching out in "Y" parallel to two more
connected USB hubs. My 'full' configuration (involving the hub
I indicated as disconnected) would involve several other devices
and chained hubs, though it doesn't even take that to lock up the BIOS,
it crashes 100% with even the simple stripped down configuration.

I can hardly remove the built in hub/card reader in the keyboard and
the monitor, and of course I need the keyboard + monitor to boot, so,
other than having an extra mouse attached I'm pretty much down
to a very common sort of minimal setup already:
USB keyboard + 2 USB mice + card reader + printer + few incidental hubs.

EDIT: UPDATE: I tested various USB configurations for about an hour
and determined that the ASUS 0501 BETA BIOS locks up when
there's a mouse plugged in to one of the hub ports on the
DELL LCD 2405FPW's built in hub. When I remove a mouse from the DELL
hub port, the ASUS BIOS boots and stays functionally responsive. When
I attach peripherals OTHER THAN a mouse to the DELL LCD USB HUB
ports, everything works with no trouble from the ASUS BIOS -- I've attached
a Sandisk Cruzer USB Flash Drive, and a BELKIN USB Wireless NIC to the
DELL LCD USB HUB and those peripherals being attached there do not impair
the ASUS BIOS function.
I tested with three mice:
1) the Microsoft Wireless Intellimouse Explorer 2.0,
2) MEMOREX MX4210 optical wheel mouse.
3) Microsoft Basic Optical Mouse
and all three cause lock-ups of the ASUS BIOS when they're attached to
either of the two DELL USB ports.
When I attach them instead to OTHER USB HUB ports NOT connected
through the DELL LCD they work and do not interfere with the ASUS BIOS boot.

When I plug in one of these mice through the DELL LCD USB HUB AFTER
I'm ALREADY in the ASUS BIOS SETUP screen, I can navigate to the USB
screen in the BIOS setup and see that it indeed detected and is counting
the mouse in its peripheral list, so it is capable of functioning through
the DELL monitor USB HUB and with the ASUS BIOS, but the bug happens
during BIOS POS specifically.

When I plug in the USB stuff to the motherboard AFTER BIOS POST
is finished, the mice and anything else will work fine in LINUX even
through the DELL LCD USB HUB.

This is very probably the exact error message I get from LINUX about
the BIOS BUG about memory reservation it happens before logging
is enabled so I have only a visual record of it but it's quite
familiar and now that I've had a chance to search for the exact text
I recognize it. I've seen similar issues with
other known buggy BIOSes in the past (e.g. VIA EPIA M), as have the
kernel authors which is undoubtedly why they put that specific check and
bug error message in the code.

PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at e0000000 is not E820-reserved

EDIT: UPDATE: Confirmed.
Here are the actual captured LINIX KERNEL BIOS bug related
error messages; it looks like there's one bug with the BIOS
making a bad ACPI data table checksum, another bug with the
BIOS not indicating its reserving of a certain memory block,
and another which relates to CPU power management's
absence [which might be actually due to either the bad checksum or
the non-reserved memory table].

PCI: BIOS Bug: MCFG area at e0000000 is not E820-reserved
PCI: Not using MMCONFIG.
PCI: Using configuration type 1
ACPI: Interpreter enabled
ACPI: (supports S0 S1 S3 S4 S5)
...
pnp: 00:0a: iomem range 0xfee00000-0xfee00fff could not be reserved
...
pnp: 00:0d: iomem range 0x0-0x9ffff could not be reserved
...
pnp: 00:0d: iomem range 0xe0000-0xfffff could not be reserved
pnp: 00:0d: iomem range 0x100000-0xcfffffff could not be reserved
...
ACPI Warning (tbutils-0158): Incorrect checksum in table [OEMB] - 7C, should be
7B [20070126]
ACPI: SSDT CFF8E0D0, 0190 (r1 AMI CPU1PM 1 INTL 20060113)
ACPI: SSDT CFF8E260, 0143 (r1 AMI CPU2PM 1 INTL 20060113)
ACPI: SSDT CFF8E3B0, 0143 (r1 AMI CPU3PM 1 INTL 20060113)
ACPI: SSDT CFF8E500, 0143 (r1 AMI CPU4PM 1 INTL 20060113)
hpet_resources: 0xfed00000 is busy
...
acpi-cpufreq: No P-States
cpufreq-core: initialization failed

EDIT: UPDATE: I got a chance to spend a few hours
researching how EIST works, reboot and go through the BIOS options
that might affect the CPU Power Management. It turns out that when
you set the CPU Multiplier in the BIOS setup away from AUTO to a given
number (e.g. X9) that causes the BIOS to delete the P-states in the ACPI
table corresponding to speed steps slower than the given speed.
That was unexpected (to me) since I'd assumed the BIOS would use
the manually set multiplier as the "normal" / "base" value (e.g. x9), but
still enable LOWER multipliers to be defined and used by the power
management (EIST/C1E/TM2) functions. Evidentally not.
The EIST/C1E/TM2 capabilities do work by changing the CPU
multiplier, so it's not unexpected that locking the CPU multiplier would
prevent the multiplier from changing in response to EIST/C1E; the only
unexpected part was the bit about it being a user set multiplier "lock"
that disabled the use of lower multipliers vs. it being just a specification
of the "desired maximum" multiplier. It doesn't necessarily make sense
in the BIOS for it to LET you change the CPU multiplier from AUTO
*and* have other distinctly usable options to enable/disable C1E etc.
but anyway now I understand what happened and have it working.

Anyway now that I changed the CPU multiplier to "AUTO" LINUX
is permitting two steps of power management for me:
* acpi-cpufreq: *P0: 2394 MHz, 88000 mW, 10 uS [1.15Vcore for my CPU]
* acpi-cpufreq: P1: 1596 MHz, 59048 mW, 10 uS [1.06Vcore for my CPU]
Where the P0 state = 266x9 and the P1 state is 266x6.
Presumably P1 would also be the speed and power/voltage that
is also used for TM2 and C1E, though I haven't tested that.

I'm still a little surprised that there aren't MORE EIST steps appearing
e.g. corresponding to each of the Q6600's possible CPU multipliers
of x9, x8, x7, x6, but I haven't seen any indication that that's actually
done in other peoples' BIOSes for the Q6600 so maybe that's "normal"
to just have the two speed steps (full and minumum frequency via
the CPU multiplier setting).

So now I'm getting happier since I have found a work-around for the
USB lock up bug, and also the EIST/C1E power management usage.

Unfortunately now it seems like I can't use the EIST power management
directly when I overclock the FSB a lot since it seems that it is not designed
to permit reducing the FSB AND the CPU multiplier AND the CPU voltage
when lower performance is acceptable, it only changes the CPU multiplier
and CPU Vcore. So maybe there is some utility I can find to change
FSB dynamically under LINUX/UNIX.

...

I think they must not make their BIOS authors actually test their releases
or use the products they apply to in 'real world' circumstances since
otherwise a lot of this stuff would NEVER make it to even a BETA
release (e.g. lockups due to USB, memory reservation errors,
broken ACPI, massively wrong indicated voltages / termperatures for several
other models I've read about etc. etc.).

Ah well I just wish there was an effective way to get more directly the
ear of the BIOS developers so we could get some of the long-absent
fixes and most desired features added in response to our feedback.
As it is it seems like we just wait and hope and maybe unplug our USB
hubs when we reboot.

I'll do more USB bug testing to see if I can narrow down the cause(s) of the
problem to certain peripherals or configurations further. I've been busy
programming and doing system burn-in to reboot / test much so far.

DONE! See above.

EDIT:
Oh, yeah, and neither the BIOS hardware monitor nor LINUX' sensors control
panel seems to be detecting the RPM of one of my two CPU fans. One is
showing up at the expected 1622 RPM on "FAN5" but "AUX FAN",
"CPU FAN", "CASE FAN" are all listed at 0 RPM and I think there may be
one or two fan connectors that actually exist on the motherboard that aren't
even mentioned in the BIOS health monitoring list or other programs I've seen.
I've got to track down what fan port the other fan is plugged into. I know
it is spinning since I've seen to that, but the absent or incorrect monitoring of
that fan port seems like a potential other BIOS bug to me so far.

UPDATE EDIT: Looks like the BIOS 0501BETA in the HARDWARE screen
monitors:
CPU FAN SPEED
CHASSIS FAN SPEED 1
CHASSIS FAN SPEED 2
CHASSIS FAN SPEED 3

...so it DOES NOT include either
CHASSIS FAN SPEED 4
or POWER FAN SPEED as it should do so since those are
available fan connectors on the motherboard.

EDIT2:
Oh yeah another BIOS problem I noticed. If I went right into the BIOS
setup by hitting DEL or whatever then I could select EZ flash from the
BIOS tools option there in the BIOS setup screens. However
at that place it did not recognize / show any files from my SanDisk USB
flash disk which had the new BIOS file on it.
However if I did NOT enter BIOS SETUP and used the ALT-F2 or whatever
sequence to go from the BIOS POST TEST screen to the EZ-FLASH, THEN
it would list the files from my USB flash disk. I think they must not actually
initialize the USB ports including your USB flash disks until a later time
in the BIOS boot process so if you try to go to BIOS SETUP or EZ FLASH
before such time as it has registered your USB disks, you cannot seemingly
use EZ flash from them.

UPDATE: EDIT: It looks like that might have been a problem with
BIOS 0202 more so than 0501 BETA.
Now with 0501 BETA BIOS if you enable LEGACY DEVICE SUPPORT
in the BIOS SETUP, you can see your USB flash disk files from either way
of entering EZ flash at least when I've recently tested it using my USB
keyboard as the means of getting into the BIOS setup (whereas in the
past I had used a PS/2 keyboard, but hopefully that's irrelevant).

Surprisingly, however, If I DO NOT enable LEGACY DEVICE SUPPORT
in the BIOS SETUP, it would not 'see' my USB SANDISK CRUZER flash disks
in EZ FLASH at all. In this case if you go to EZ FLASH you get the
nice error message:
"There Are No Any Existing Drives!"

I'm not sure how a modern USB flash disk is a 'legacy'
device whereas a mouse and keyboard isn't but whatever.

So FWIW in case it's helpful to anyone, that's what I now know about
BIOS 0501 BETA.

I had some of these sort of usb issues with earlier P5K dlx bioses. I don't think it has much to do with the bios version at all actually.

no usb problems here I have two hubs, 2 mice, keyboard, usb drink cooler, SD/CF card reader, and an ipod. as for your ACPI troubles enable ACPI 2.0 in the power section of the bios. I get no such errors with several Linux install CDs. I don't have speedstep or C1e enabled. you might need to get a newer kernel and compile your kernel because it sounds to me like your running an old kernel.

Flash only beta's at your own risk, and give feedback...listing all your hardware could be nice and not just say on your rig it sucks doesn't help others ...

There can be issues on some combination of hardware, that's why they are beta's and some don't even make it into a final release, some are even withdrawn hours after release as they seem to bork some mobo's,....

And due to the abundance of hardware floating around it's kinda hard to release one bios that supports all...

Also the rule of thumb is : If it ain't broke don't fix it !!! so only flash if you really need it !!

It's at your own risk to flash and use a beta, some are good, some suck , some kill boards, some make your rig fly... only way to find out is to give them a try or let others do it for you... but you know you are taking a risk !!! If it ian't good flash back to the workign one... and share ya findings with the engineers.... and us....

[synergy]

I'm using the 311 Bios on my P5K Dlx Q6600 G0, no issues here, works good for me, except for the mem dumps when the overclock isn't stable. Is that suppose to happen?

I've never seen than since I have yet to get to the point of OCing mine.
But I wouldn't be surprised if it was an understandable outcome of a crash
due to system instability.

It's pretty common to get 'blue screen' memory dumps or other dumps from
other situations whenever there's a serious instability.

[synergy]

I'm going to ask this question again, could someone please respond: I'm currently using BIOS 311 with my Q6600 G0 processor, however according to asus's website, BIOS 311 isn't compatable with this stepping and I MUST use 404 or newer. I find 311 to be an xtremely good OCing BIOS and I really have no issues with this BIOS so I was trying to aviod flashing to any of those newer BIOSes. Everything seems great with this 311 BIOS, chip is recognized perfectly on POST, It OC's like a dream, etc..... So why does asus say I (we) need to run BIOS 404 or newer with the chip? Forgot to mention that I am using a P5K-DLX motherboard

I have no idea WHY Intel and ASUS say you must have a new BIOS for
Q6600 G0, but that is the official documentation from both sources.

In practice I know I was able to boot with P5K DELUXE BIOS 0202 with the
Q6600 G0 and go into BIOS setup and when it was booting use the reflash option
to upgrade the BIOS etc. So it can't be completely broken even with the old
BIOS versions.

However with BIOS 0202 I did get a message similar to
"Error loading ucode on Intel CPU" or somewhat similar phrasing. That error
message didn't seem to totally prevent the use of the PC, though.
The error message did go away when I flashed to the newer BIOS, though.

I don't know if there are (yet) any microcode updates for CPU stepping G0
that a newer BIOS could apply for better system stability. I know that
the older Q6600 steppings (B3 and previous) have ucode updates that
the BIOS or maybe also the OS could apply to help work-around
CPU bugs that could crash your system under certain circumstances.

Otherwise, "if it works for you, don't fix it".

[sponge bob]

any help?! my e6850 seems to have fsb wall @ 475 i tryed with e6700 and fsb goed well over 500, maybe ther is some settings that wont let me past of 475 with e6850.

using asus p5k deluxe and adata ddr1066 memories.

Edit: it is a strap / divider problem... i need advice and sub timmings for p35

[eva2000]

any help?! my e6850 seems to have fsb wall @ 475 i tryed with e6700 and fsb goed well over 500, maybe ther is some settings that wont let me past of 475 with e6850.

using asus p5k deluxe and adata ddr1066 memories.

Edit: it is a strap / divider problem... i need advice and sub timmings for p35

what batch/pack date is your E6850 ?