[18th Anniversary] Asus Black Pearl - P5k-Premium Testing Report

[jamiee]

Hey Sesdave,
"The device Root\LEGACY_TAT\0000 disappeared from the system without first being prepared for removal."

Looks like you removed a USB drive or something before disabling it in windows first.



Anyway, guys I'm happy to say my new board has held up just fine!
Currently running my CPU at 3904MHz (8x488MHz) 1.4v on air.

I may try higher for fun, but I think 3.8-3.9GHz is just fine for 24/7 use.


cheers,

[sesdave]

Looks like you removed a USB drive or something before disabling it in windows first.



Anyway, guys I'm happy to say my new board has held up just fine!
Currently running my CPU at 3904MHz (8x488MHz) 1.4v on air.

I may try higher for fun, but I think 3.8-3.9GHz is just fine for 24/7 use.


cheers,

Nice clock - I want to RMA mine for one of these! Everything comes to those that wait - lol!

[ChaosMinionX]

Looks like you removed a USB drive or something before disabling it in windows first.



Anyway, guys I'm happy to say my new board has held up just fine!
Currently running my CPU at 3904MHz (8x488MHz) 1.4v on air.

I may try higher for fun, but I think 3.8-3.9GHz is just fine for 24/7 use.


cheers,

Exact same clock I had on my premium when I was using it, 489x8 with DDR2 976 4-4-4-10 the thing flew in futuremark stuff

[Budwise]

whatever you do never run Asus Update on this board. Mine is now dead... See my thread in the main Intel section...

[nicepun]

Well I just updated to 0402 and I'm still having probs with RAID. I have one WD400GB SATAII and two Hitachi DeskStarts SATAI. The only good thing that I've been able to do is to finally achieve 500FSB with a X3210 G0.

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=257859

[jamiee]

Currently testing out 7x510 = 3.57GHz.
Seems pretty solid so far.

[thefiddler]

Actually, it looks like the error I had about the "device removed without being prepared for removal" comes from Intel TAT when closing it. Nothing to worry about.


That said, I was wondering something: I heard that applications like CoreTemp were not giving exact temperature readings with the new Quads G0. Is that still true with CoreTemp 0.95.4?

Mine reads the following:
- Tjunction: 100°C
- Cores: between 36°C and 43°C (depending on which core)

(room temp is at around 25°C)

[sesdave]

Actually, it looks like the error I had about the "device removed without being prepared for removal" comes from Intel TAT when closing it. Nothing to worry about.


That said, I was wondering something: I heard that applications like CoreTemp were not giving exact temperature readings with the new Quads G0. Is that still true with CoreTemp 0.95.4?

Mine reads the following:
- Tjunction: 100°C
- Cores: between 36°C and 43°C (depending on which core)

(room temp is at around 25°C)

Coretemp 95.4,everest Ultimate beta or PC wizard 2008- all good. With a 7 degree difference between cores you should check your HS seating and check to see if your IHS and HS are flat with a razor - - if uneven Lapping one or both may benefit your core temp and lower the individual core temp difference .

[thefiddler]

I already had that core temperature difference when the Q6600 was on my old P5W DH Deluxe. Since then, I changed to the P5K Premium and thus reseated the HS.

I already thought about lapping the IHS and HS, but I didn't have enough time at the moment. Do you have any good tutorial on how to do this?

[bladek]

The only good thing that I've been able to do is to finally achieve 500FSB with a X3210 G0.

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=257859

Currently testing out 7x510 = 3.57GHz.
Seems pretty solid so far.

Any BIOS setting for reaching 500fsb?!
I can't past 475FSB with my Q6600 G0 L725B020 (pack date 08/16/07).

[TI66ER]

My 6750 does 500fsb,which is 4ghz.Here are my settings for 4ghz,if they are useful to anyone else.

FSB STRAP TO NB-333
FSB FREQUENCY-500
PCI-E FREQUENCY-101
DRAM FREQUENCY-1000
DRAM COMMAND RATE-2T
DRAM TIMING CONTROL-MANUAL
TRANSACTION BOOSTER-AUTO
CLOCK OVERCHARGING MODE-AUTO
CPU SPREAD SPECTRUM-DISABLED
PCI-E SPREAD SPECTRUM-DISABLED
CPU VOLTAGE-1.5625V
CPU VOLTAGE REFERANCE-0.63X
CPU VOLTAGE DAMPER-ENABLED
cpu pll voltage-1.50v
dram voltage-2.25v
fsb termination voltage-1.3
north bridge voltage-1.4v
nb voltage referance-auto
sb voltage auto

[thefiddler]

Well, I spoke too fast.

I still get the same kind of error messages than those I had with my Hitachi HDDs. Also, the computer just made a BSOD a few minutes ago.

I noticed those errors were showing up when transfering large files from a partition to another or from a drive to another. To be more precise, it looks like transfering a large file from a partition on HDD#2 from another partition on HDD#2 doesn't generate any error. But transfering the same large file from HDD#2 to HDD#1 or from a partition on HDD#1 to another partition on HDD#1 returns errors, and eventually BSOD.

The following error appears a few times in the Event Viewer:
"An error was detected on device \Device\Harddisk0\D during a paging operation."

Directly followed by this one:
"The device, \Device\Ide\iaStor0, did not respond within the timeout period."



Now, what I do not know is: what is causing these errors? The mobo and its SATA controller? The Intel Chipset Driver? The Intel Matrix Software? :/

(I ran SeaTools on both drives, and they're passing all tests.)

[nicepun]

Any BIOS setting for reaching 500fsb?!
I can't past 475FSB with my Q6600 G0 L725B020 (pack date 08/16/07).

I'll post my settings when I get home but when I had a Q6600 G0 that highest I could go was 480FSB -- just something to think about. I tried three different Q6600 G0s too.

[Devious]

I'll post my settings when I get home but when I had a Q6600 G0 that highest I could go was 480FSB -- just something to think about. I tried three different Q6600 G0s too.

Hmm, seems a coindicence that three different Q6600's wouldnt go past 480FSB.

My Q6600 wont budge past 444 FSB with any multi, I thought it may be the CPU but now im thinking it may be my board ?

[sesdave]

Well, I spoke too fast.

I still get the same kind of error messages than those I had with my Hitachi HDDs. Also, the computer just made a BSOD a few minutes ago.

I noticed those errors were showing up when transfering large files from a partition to another or from a drive to another. To be more precise, it looks like transfering a large file from a partition on HDD#2 from another partition on HDD#2 doesn't generate any error. But transfering the same large file from HDD#2 to HDD#1 or from a partition on HDD#1 to another partition on HDD#1 returns errors, and eventually BSOD.

The following error appears a few times in the Event Viewer:
"An error was detected on device \Device\Harddisk0\D during a paging operation."

Directly followed by this one:
"The device, \Device\Ide\iaStor0, did not respond within the timeout period."



Now, what I do not know is: what is causing these errors? The mobo and its SATA controller? The Intel Chipset Driver? The Intel Matrix Software? :/

(I ran SeaTools on both drives, and they're passing all tests.)

Have a look at this link - chazbot seems to know what he is talking about.
http://forum.vgcats.com/printthread.php?t=10057
Take his last point - if you have 2GB or more of memory set your paging file to 0 and you wont get any more paging file failures cos it wont exist on the drive! I always do that anyway - who needs a paging file with 4GB of RAM. Might be worth checking your memory - it doesnt last forever when overclocked and sometimes even when its not overclocked - lol!

[sesdave]

I already had that core temperature difference when the Q6600 was on my old P5W DH Deluxe. Since then, I changed to the P5K Premium and thus reseated the HS.

I already thought about lapping the IHS and HS, but I didn't have enough time at the moment. Do you have any good tutorial on how to do this?

Check them with a razor first cos you dont want to waste your time and end up with sore wrists for nothing-lol!
This is as good a guide as any - http://www.thetechrepository.com/sho...hlight=lapping I used it when I did my E6600 - use black wet and dry sandpaper(dont use water like some suggest). Here is another one for the heatsink http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.a...tno=433&pgno=1.

[scaramonga]

who needs a paging file with 4GB of RAM

Every Windows system needs a pagefile regardless of how much RAM is installed. Some software will complain if there is not a decent size pagefile present (Photoshop springs to mind).

Even if you set pagefile to '0' or disable, Windows will still create a small pagefile for general usage.

[thefiddler]

Thanks for the lapping links Sesdave, I'll probably do that in a few days.


As for the pagefile, I guess Scaramonga isn't wrong. Pagefile isn't useless, even with a lot of RAM. I don't remember the specific size Photoshop needs, though. I'd find that information useful, if you remember it, Scaramonga.



I find it not that easy to reproduce the errors I'm getting on transfering large files. It looks like when the computer had been recently started/booted, errors will not show up.

Scaramonga, I see you're using 7200.10 320GB drives as I do. Are you experiencing issues like I do?

If not, could you please give me details on your setup?
Which SATA connectors are you using on the P5K Premium, are your drives running in SATA2 (jumper removed) or in SATA1, which board rev you got (all red capacitors?), and such?

[sesdave]

Every Windows system needs a pagefile regardless of how much RAM is installed. Some software will complain if there is not a decent size pagefile present (Photoshop springs to mind).

Even if you set pagefile to '0' or disable, Windows will still create a small pagefile for general usage.

Whilst I was aware that some apps need it - I set one up as and when but I always run with it disabled. What I didnt know is that windows creates a small paging file irrespective - I would like to check that out because it doesnt seem logical for the operating system to need a small file when there is loads of spare RAM - is that applicable to Vista x64. I can understand it when Winxp was running on 1GB but we are now talking of 2-8GB availability. Thinking about it I always had it disabled even on 1GB with winXP and never had any problems. I am always ready to learn so convince me why I should switch it back on - apart from the fact that some badly written apps need it-lol!

[scaramonga]

Scaramonga, I see you're using 7200.10 320GB drives as I do. Are you experiencing issues like I do?

If not, could you please give me details on your setup?
Which SATA connectors are you using on the P5K Premium, are your drives running in SATA2 (jumper removed) or in SATA1, which board rev you got (all red capacitors?), and such?

No issues whatsoever buddy

SATA 1,2 & 4 I think....all RED anyway. All 3 drives with jumper removed and running in SATA 2 mode - RAID 0. Created a 30Gb 'slice' for system (this greatly improves speed) and the rest for install/storage.

Board is made in China with red capacitiors (so...Rev 1.0 I think?)



Intel Matrix Report:

System Information

Kit Installed: 7.6.0.1011
Kit Install History: 7.6.0.1011
Shell Version: 7.6.0.1011

OS Name: Microsoft Windows XP Professional
OS Version: 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 Build 2600
System Name: XXXXXX-XXXXXX
System Manufacturer: ASUSTeK Computer INC.
System Model: P5K Premium
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz
BIOS Version/Date: American Megatrends Inc. 0402 , 10/04/2007

Language: ENU

Intel(R) RAID Technology

Intel RAID Controller: Intel(R) ICH8R/ICH9R SATA RAID Controller
Number of Serial ATA ports: 6

RAID Option ROM Version: 7.5.0.1017
Driver Version: 7.6.0.1011
RAID Plug-In Version: 7.6.0.1011
Language Resource Version of the RAID Plug-In: 7.6.0.1011
Create Volume Wizard Version: 7.6.0.1011
Language Resource Version of the Create Volume Wizard: 7.6.0.1011
Create Volume from Existing Hard Drive Wizard Version: 7.6.0.1011
Language Resource Version of the Create Volume from Existing Hard Drive Wizard: 7.6.0.1011
Modify Volume Wizard Version: 7.6.0.1011
Language Resource Version of the Modify Volume Wizard: 7.6.0.1011
Delete Volume Wizard Version: 7.6.0.1011
Language Resource Version of the Delete Volume Wizard: 7.6.0.1011
ISDI Library Version: 7.6.0.1011
Event Monitor User Notification Tool Version: 7.6.0.1011
Language Resource Version of the Event Monitor User Notification Tool: 7.6.0.1011
Event Monitor Version: 7.6.0.1011

Array_0000
Status: No active migration(s)
Hard Drive Write Cache Enabled: Yes
Size: 894.2 GB
Free Space: 0 GB
Number of Hard Drives: 3
Hard Drive Member 1: ST3320620AS
Hard Drive Member 2: ST3320620AS
Hard Drive Member 3: ST3320620AS
Number of Volumes: 2
Volume Member 1: RAIDSlice
Volume Member 2: RAIDMain

RAIDSlice
Status: Normal
System Volume: Yes
Volume Write-Back Cache Enabled: Yes
RAID Level: RAID 0 (striping)
Strip Size: 64 KB
Size: 30 GB
Physical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Logical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Number of Hard Drives: 3
Hard Drive Member 1: ST3320620AS
Hard Drive Member 2: ST3320620AS
Hard Drive Member 3: ST3320620AS
Parent Array: Array_0000

RAIDMain
Status: Normal
System Volume: No
Volume Write-Back Cache Enabled: Yes
RAID Level: RAID 0 (striping)
Strip Size: 64 KB
Size: 864.2 GB
Physical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Logical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Number of Hard Drives: 3
Hard Drive Member 1: ST3320620AS
Hard Drive Member 2: ST3320620AS
Hard Drive Member 3: ST3320620AS
Parent Array: Array_0000

Hard Drive 0
Usage: Array member
Status: Normal
Device Port: 0
Device Port Location: Internal
Current Serial ATA Transfer Mode: Generation 2 <------------------------ Note
Model: ST3320620AS
Serial Number: 9QF54ZW0
Firmware: 3.AAK
Native Command Queuing Support: Yes
Hard Drive Write Cache Enabled: Yes
Size: 298 GB
Physical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Logical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Number of Volumes: 2
Volume Member 1: RAIDSlice
Volume Member 2: RAIDMain
Parent Array: Array_0000

Hard Drive 1
Usage: Array member
Status: Normal
Device Port: 1
Device Port Location: Internal
Current Serial ATA Transfer Mode: Generation 2 <------------------------ Note
Model: ST3320620AS
Serial Number: 5QF162N4
Firmware: 3.AAE
Native Command Queuing Support: Yes
Hard Drive Write Cache Enabled: Yes
Size: 298 GB
Physical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Logical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Number of Volumes: 2
Volume Member 1: RAIDSlice
Volume Member 2: RAIDMain
Parent Array: Array_0000

Hard Drive 2
Usage: Array member
Status: Normal
Device Port: 4
Device Port Location: Internal
Current Serial ATA Transfer Mode: Generation 2 <------------------------ Note
Model: ST3320620AS
Serial Number: 5QF12F5Y
Firmware: 3.AAE
Native Command Queuing Support: Yes
Hard Drive Write Cache Enabled: Yes
Size: 298 GB
Physical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Logical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Number of Volumes: 2
Volume Member 1: RAIDSlice
Volume Member 2: RAIDMain
Parent Array: Array_0000

[thefiddler]

Well, looks a lot like my system.
I don't use RAID though, only AHCI.

Your board has only red capacitors?
Do you have the board's serial number by chance?


About that RAID set up... Have you got a tutorial on how to set that kind of RAID 0/1? I'm not really familiar with RAID set ups.


Also, which Chipset Driver version did you use?


(and sorry for asking so many questions... I'd really like to understand what is going wrong with my set up. I'm not even sure it's the board)

[sesdave]

Well, looks a lot like my system.
I don't use RAID though, only AHCI.

Your board has only red capacitors?
Do you have the board's serial number by chance?


About that RAID set up... Have you got a tutorial on how to set that kind of RAID 0/1? I'm not really familiar with RAID set ups.


Also, which Chipset Driver version did you use?


(and sorry for asking so many questions... I'd really like to understand what is going wrong with my set up. I'm not even sure it's the board)

I posted this a few days ago re setting up matrix raid 0/1 on 2 drives - http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...25&postcount=4
may save Scaramonga some typing but feel free to add or correct for that matter - from one sweaty to another-lol!.

[jamiee]

Any BIOS setting for reaching 500fsb?!
I can't past 475FSB with my Q6600 G0 L725B020 (pack date 08/16/07).

No special settings other than the usual stuff.
510FSB ran just fine over night, so I'm now testing at (7x520MHz = 3640MHz)
Seems like I got a decent board

[nicepun]

No special settings other than the usual stuff.
510FSB ran just fine over night, so I'm now testing at (7x520MHz = 3640MHz)
Seems like I got a decent board

and decent chip as well, since cpu also have FSB walls more than mobos.

[jamiee]

Yes indeed.

I'm likely limiting my E6850 a bit by using a Zalman CNPS9700NT on it and the fact that the ambient temps around here are still quite warm for this time of year. Putting this rig on water would be interesting but I don't know if I'm that adventurous


I had the same components on a Striker Extreme and it never did as well as the Premium has (not even close really).