ASUS P5W DH - Problems + Fixes Thread

[Falkentyne]

Forget the overclocking. I'm having another problem, and it's serious.
Unfortunately, I don't think anyone is going to be able to help with this, and I could be just completely screwed, but here goes...

Basically, the system is **SLOW**.
It seems to be using something like 1% of the available processing power.
It's FINE in safe mode, but NOT in normal mode.

I'm currently not at that system, but I did a 1M SuperPi run and I think it completed in something like 3 minutes and 48 seconds. I checked Speedfan and Coretemp, and the temps were going up by a whopping TWO degrees at best. I think speedfan went from 34C idle to 35C with Superpi/4 prime threads.

I ran Prime with 4 threads, and the temps went up by again, like 1C or something. I think the cores read: 31C, 32C, 27C, 30C.

When I did the same thing in safe mode, Speedfan went up a LOT more, to 48C. Also, the 1M SuperPi score was around 15.8 seconds...a LOT better than 3 minutes.

Is this a BIOS bug or something? (CPU-Z identifies the CPU, cache and etc correctly). Is this a problem with windows, that can be fixed somehow?

Note: EVERYTHING runs at proper speed if I disable 2 cores in the boot.ini, where the NUMPROC switch is. The problem is when I remove that switch and boot with all 4 cores.

Any suggestions, people? I updated to 2406 with no change.
I need to know if this is a BIOS bug, or is my OS improperly configured somehow, after using a Core 2 X6800 for a year?

I'll buy a new board if I have to, but I want to make SURE it's the board or the BIOS first.

This may not be of help, but why does System Properties, in control panel, say this? (again sorry no screenshots):

Computer:
Intel Core 2(TM) Extreme
CPU X9650 @ 3.00 ghz
360 mhz, 2.00 GB of RAM <---------???
Physical Address Extension <---------??? wth....

360 mhz?
PAE? WHAT? T_T

I changed the multiplier from 9 to 10, and that "360 mhz" became 400 mhz. (core speed was reported at 3.33 ghz).

On my older single core system, that exact same location had the CPU string for 3.4 ghz (P4 extreme Northwood), and showing 3.61 ghz. (yes, overclocked a bit, forgot the exact settings, but 3.6 ghz in BIOS).

[Unbornchild]

Computer:
Intel Core 2(TM) Extreme
CPU X9650 @ 3.00 ghz
360 mhz, 2.00 GB of RAM <---------???
Physical Address Extension <---------??? wth....

You actually have 2 GB RAM installed? Or is it 4 GB. Then you'd see Physical Address Extension (PAE): http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system...AE/PAEdrv.mspx




About your problem, Did you enable memory remapping in BIOS?

[Falkentyne]

I have 2 gigs of RAM installed. (2*1 GB of G.skill).
I've tried turning on and off remapping, doesn't do anything.

NOTE, in SAFE MODE, Windows not only does NOT show PAE, it also shows the real CPU speed. But in normal mode, it thinks it's 400-500 mhz.

I think I had that type of performance when I used Intel PAT on my X6800 and set the CPU duty cycle to 87.5&#37;...well then again it was still a lot faster (UT2004 was perfectly playable at that speed).

FWIW, I'm running on 2 cores now and things are running fine so far. (for some reason I had to install new Catalyst drivers or I got blue screens in UT2004 with 2 cores disabled (huh?). I'm at 3.6 ghz and 1.3v (haven't tried lower or higher). If the 4 core thing is a bug, I want it fixed. If it's something with my windows installation, well, huh...... O_O

I tried a repair install, (not a clean install; I can't stand redownloading everything from scratch, HOWEVER I do have a clean empty E: drive...maybe if I'm bored I'll install windows on THAT from scratch later on) that took forever, and even the repair install didn't solve anything (except made my Windows updates uninstallable without that workaround from microsoft for update+repair installations).

It DOES sound like a sort of driver bug, but it doesn't make sense.... why would the OS think my CPU is 400 mhz, but CPUZ finds the real speed ? Not sure what Coretemp reports....My system is completely up to date with windows updates....

If the clean install tomorrow doesn't work, then its CLEARLY a BIOS bug...eitiher that or Yorkfields only work on Vista? (doesn't seem like thats the case...). My gut feeling says it's 70% a BIOS issue. Unless someone else has seen this and can replicate it somehow....

And, why does disabling 2 cores make everything work as it should? (EXCEPT even with 2 cores running, the identification in system properties still says 360-400+ mhz, AND PAE enabled O_O.....) If it says that with 2 cores, why can't the system run at full speed with 4? T_T

[Unbornchild]

If you must disable PAE but your system processor supports hardware-enforced DEP, add /NOPAE /NOEXECUTE=alwaysoff to your Boot.ini file. Note: This will disable the DEP feature on your computer.

People who also have 4 GB installed can also add /MAXMEM=2048 in the boot.ini



EDIT: sorry Falkentyne for i'm not posting anything usefull info for your problem, i'm only mumbling .... your question pointed me to the PAE i saw on my Maximus system...

Hey, Asus didn't take the P5WDH off the 45nm support page for nothing!

[mikepaul]

Hey, Asus didn't take the P5WDH off the 45nm support page for nothing!

Hey, what did I miss??? I want a new CPU next year, and I had my heart set on one of the NEW ones. Not a new motherboard too...

[Unbornchild]

Has been posted many times, mikepaul. See ---> http://event.asus.com/mb/45nm/

[mikepaul]

Has been posted many times, mikepaul. See ---> http://event.asus.com/mb/45nm/

Like I say, I didn't notice any postings discussing the list being changed, and I see that the list doesn't include the DH Deluxe so I'm seriously annoyed that my good feelings towards this MB from back when it WAS listed were unfounded...

[DrSlump]

I have 2 gigs of RAM installed. (2*1 GB of G.skill).
I've tried turning on and off remapping, doesn't do anything.

NOTE, in SAFE MODE, Windows not only does NOT show PAE, it also shows the real CPU speed. But in normal mode, it thinks it's 400-500 mhz.

I think I had that type of performance when I used Intel PAT on my X6800 and set the CPU duty cycle to 87.5%...well then again it was still a lot faster (UT2004 was perfectly playable at that speed).

FWIW, I'm running on 2 cores now and things are running fine so far. (for some reason I had to install new Catalyst drivers or I got blue screens in UT2004 with 2 cores disabled (huh?). I'm at 3.6 ghz and 1.3v (haven't tried lower or higher). If the 4 core thing is a bug, I want it fixed. If it's something with my windows installation, well, huh...... O_O

I tried a repair install, (not a clean install; I can't stand redownloading everything from scratch, HOWEVER I do have a clean empty E: drive...maybe if I'm bored I'll install windows on THAT from scratch later on) that took forever, and even the repair install didn't solve anything (except made my Windows updates uninstallable without that workaround from microsoft for update+repair installations).

It DOES sound like a sort of driver bug, but it doesn't make sense.... why would the OS think my CPU is 400 mhz, but CPUZ finds the real speed ? Not sure what Coretemp reports....My system is completely up to date with windows updates....

If the clean install tomorrow doesn't work, then its CLEARLY a BIOS bug...eitiher that or Yorkfields only work on Vista? (doesn't seem like thats the case...). My gut feeling says it's 70% a BIOS issue. Unless someone else has seen this and can replicate it somehow....

And, why does disabling 2 cores make everything work as it should? (EXCEPT even with 2 cores running, the identification in system properties still says 360-400+ mhz, AND PAE enabled O_O.....) If it says that with 2 cores, why can't the system run at full speed with 4? T_T

Hi, it seems a driver related problem.
Two tries:
one, try a 64 bit live linux distro, it's simple and fast: download the live linux, put into your drive, reboot and start it

two, try a clean windows vista install, better if 64 bit.

Good luck