"ASUS P5Q Deluxe discussion".

[bigcesar]

the BIOS 1402 is very good.

[mjh74]

Oh my LIFE your vcore!

[truehighroller]

Yah that is a little un called for. I would turn that down, way down. 1.35v maybe 1.36..

[LUCI5R]

true ...

did you ever hear back from your friend at ASUS regarding the BIOS?
It appears that I've run into similar problems as yours. Earlier it was just the Shut Down issue, but now if I boot into Vista with any BIOS > 0803, I get BSOD shortly after. Only with BIOS 0803 is my system running stable & without issues. The BSOD's and reboots and freezes knocked out my system so bad that I'm having to format my drive & reinstall Vista later today.

I'm stuck on 0803 now (Won't even try going into anything higher), until they can issue a better BIOS for us Q9450 owners.

[truehighroller]

No but, I sent him an email with all those videos links so, I am sure I will hear from him today. I have told him there are people with my issue besides me so.,..

[CryptiK]

Here's the spec sheet for the Q9000 series cpus:

http://download.intel.com/design/pro...hts/318726.pdf

It's table 2-3, DC Voltage and current specifications, 1.26 for the 4 series chipset family.

Thanks for that. I wonder if the same applies to the e8000 series dual core processors on the P45 chipset? I also wonder that if it only applies to the quads, why that would be, and if that means that the Vtt circuitry of the quads are more robust than the dual cores?

**EDIT - I just DL'd the latest version of the e8000 data sheet, and it also now says 1.2v standard, 1.14v min and 1.26v max for Vtt. I wonder why it's different for the 4 series chipsets? Well at least I now know up to 1.26v is safe, I was using 1.25v sometimes during benches and was slightly concerned I was over the max. Good news indeed.

true ...

did you ever hear back from your friend at ASUS regarding the BIOS?
It appears that I've run into similar problems as yours. Earlier it was just the Shut Down issue, but now if I boot into Vista with any BIOS > 0803, I get BSOD shortly after. Only with BIOS 0803 is my system running stable & without issues. The BSOD's and reboots and freezes knocked out my system so bad that I'm having to format my drive & reinstall Vista later today.

I'm stuck on 0803 now (Won't even try going into anything higher), until they can issue a better BIOS for us Q9450 owners.

It is quite concerning that it was initially fine for a period of time, then there was a non shutdown issue, then finally complete instability. I would be quite concerned that the cpu was damaged, as nothing else really explains the rapid degradation to complete instability.

I would have thought Asus would have tested all processors with their bioses, and it is disappointing this situation has arisen. If the cpu is damaged, along with truehighroller's and no doubt countless others globally, Asus will have a lot to answer for, and they should be replacing all affected cpu's immediately, along with immediately removing that option from the BIOS and any future BIOS releases.

[LUCI5R]

It is quite concerning that it was initially fine for a period of time, then there was a non shutdown issue, then finally complete instability. I would be quite concerned that the cpu was damaged, as nothing else really explains the rapid degradation to complete instability.

I would have thought Asus would have tested all processors with their bioses, and it is disappointing this situation has arisen. If the cpu is damaged, along with truehighroller's and no doubt countless others globally, Asus will have a lot to answer for, and they should be replacing all affected cpu's immediately, along with immediately removing that option from the BIOS and any future BIOS releases.

I hear you.
At this point I'm terribly annoyed with ASUS. If indeed their BIOS is 'damaging' the chip permanently in any way, that's unacceptable. For the longest time, I hesitated to believe that my sudden 'Shutdown' issue had anything to do with truehighroller's extreme 'No-Boot-Into-Vista' issue ... but over the weekend experiencing something drastically similar, and the fact that in BIOS 0803 everything works as it should, pretty much confirms I'm suffering with a degredation of my Q9450 as is truehighroller.

This is so totally unacceptable.
There is a very big difference between the BIOS not working out for you and the BIOS Damaging your chip. I don't think they can get away with this.

Right now I'm hoping truehighroller's friend gets back to him at some point about this and hopefully there is a fix.

[Rise]

true ...

did you ever hear back from your friend at ASUS regarding the BIOS?
It appears that I've run into similar problems as yours. Earlier it was just the Shut Down issue, but now if I boot into Vista with any BIOS > 0803, I get BSOD shortly after. Only with BIOS 0803 is my system running stable & without issues. The BSOD's and reboots and freezes knocked out my system so bad that I'm having to format my drive & reinstall Vista later today.

I'm stuck on 0803 now (Won't even try going into anything higher), until they can issue a better BIOS for us Q9450 owners.

I haven't checked this thread since page 23 or so and I have yet to update my bios from what the board came with. After reading your post though, apparently something has happened in the 120 pages of this thread since then which worries me from upgrading anytime soon - considering I am running a Q9450 in it as well.

what did I miss here?! the bios is damaging the chip???

[truehighroller]

Is everyone else having xtreme latency issues with the xtreme site like me? Back on subject, yes I want them to replace my shiznit.. That is what mine did it was a little testy then pow, it wouldn't work any more with over 0803. It has to do with whatever that setting controlls..

[CryptiK]

Yeah it's been Xtremely slow for about 24 hours now. Actually for the last 5 mins its been fine. Before that I had enough time to make a coffee and drink it while I waited for a thread to open.

I would definitely be onto Asus to replace the cpu's guys, that's appalling. I hope you find a resolution.

[LUCI5R]

I'm going to be giving ASUS a call, believe me - and they won't get away that easily with Damaging my chip with their BIOS. I don't think technically I can fight on BIOS 1403 because it's not an official BIOS release. However, I can fight on 1306 which is an Official Release and gives same results as any other > 0803 BIOS. If my chip is damaged, I'm going after them. This is bull.

OT: Yes, the site has had major lags. I gave up ample times. Seems to be running fine now. Typical DDOS behavior IMHO, scary.

[v0dka]

I have a questions regarding the P5Q-E that I would like to ask.

Does this board need more Vcore than other boards? On my simple DS3R I needed only 1.40v real for 3.7Ghz and now I need 1.43v or more. Am I missing something with GTL tweaking perhaps? I noticed little to no effect on stability from tweaking various motherboard voltages, and set them to deafult values. CPU is a Q6600.

[Leeghoofd]

Has any of the degrading Q9450 users tested the cpu on another board ? ever thought of an issue with the mobo due to eg an updated firmware of some sort, leading to an unrecoverable incompatability with the OC required... we experienced similar behaviour on the 680i platform where one bios update too much ruined 65nm quad performance from anice OC to zilch... I hardly suspect CPU damage yet more incompatability related... and if the cpu runs at stock hardly anything you can do...

[LUCI5R]

Question for you guys.

My Q9450 is under Manufacturer's Warranty by Intel.
If I did want to get it replaced by Intel, does anybody here know what's the process? I have never dealt with Intel. And Newegg only gives 30 day warranty on CPU's.

Also - would this be worthwhile? I have no clue how's Intel's warranty.

Thanks!

[Ket]

Yah that is a little un called for. I would turn that down, way down. 1.35v maybe 1.36..

1.6v is massive overkill, but no need to turn it right down to 1.36v. Considering vdroop\drop, up to 1.42v is ok.

[CryptiK]

Has any of the degrading Q9450 users tested the cpu on another board ? ever thought of an issue with the mobo due to eg an updated firmware of some sort, leading to an unrecoverable incompatability with the OC required... we experienced similar behaviour on the 680i platform where one bios update too much ruined 65nm quad performance from anice OC to zilch... I hardly suspect CPU damage yet more incompatability related... and if the cpu runs at stock hardly anything you can do...

Good point, I was thinking that if the cpu's run exactly as they should using BIOS 803, then they should not be damaged.

However the fact that they ran fine on BIOS version >803 for a period of time, then strange behaviour began, then worsened to the point where stability even at stock clocks was unachievable, is concerning.

Sure an incompatibility issue from directly after a BIOS flash can happen, but being fine initially then gradually getting worse and worse is odd.

[ThugsRook]

does this seem to be "CPU Margin Enhancement" related?

[LUCI5R]

does this seem to be "CPU Margin Enhancement" related?

Yes! Like Totally.

[anzial]

Yes! Like Totally.

which setting allegedly kills the cpu?

[Leeghoofd]

Another myth ? Don't jump too rapidly on the bandwagon.... Like I stated has True or Lucifer had the chance to test the CPU on another board ? are they sure there board is not the culprit instead of a "damaged" CPU... Does the CPU still run at stock speeds Lucifer ? what reason are you gonna RMA it with ? I can't OC it anymore ?

Test more on another platform before launching something that will get totally out of proportion...

Sorry I have to react as sceptical... there's an issue with the 9450 series for sure... but has the board damaged ya CPU ? Ya OC ? or is just an irreversible bios flash that cannot be corrected unless you RMA the board...

[LUCI5R]

Does the CPU still run at stock speeds Lucifer ? what reason are you gonna RMA it with ? I can't OC it anymore ?

sure... but has the board damaged ya CPU ? Ya OC ? or is just an irreversible bios flash that cannot be corrected unless you RMA the board...

OC is not even in the picture here. This is all on Stock. The CPU will NOT run on Stock on any BIOS > 0803. Only on 0803 is the CPU functional and I can boot into Vista.

If the CPU won't run Stock on an Official BIOS release greater then 0803, then yes, I definately have something to butt heads against with ASUS. With Intel, I'm not sure.

I don't have any concrete proof the CPU is damaged - I don't have another board to test it in. The basics I have right now is that my CPU will NOT FUNCTION with the "CPU Margin Enhancement" setting available in the BIOS - regardless of what value you give that setting. That, in my opinion, is unacceptable - as that Setting is available in all current, post 0803 BIOS releases by ASUS.

The valid argument here is: You are releasing & providing a BIOS that is crippling function of my CPU. Has it damaged my CPU permanently, I don't know! You need to prove it by providing me with a functional, current release BIOS that works with my CPU.

[truehighroller]

I have eliminated the rma board part and the BIOS chips I have replaced as well... It will not go into windows at all without an overclock or with check out my videos to see exactly what happens here Leo.. I posted them for an easy look at what happens for the sceptical.

[LUCI5R]

OC is not even in the picture here. This is all on Stock. The CPU will NOT run on Stock on any BIOS > 0803. Only on 0803 is the CPU functional and I can boot into Vista.

If the CPU won't run Stock on an Official BIOS release greater then 0803, then yes, I definately have something to butt heads against with ASUS. With Intel, I'm not sure.

I don't have any concrete proof the CPU is damaged - I don't have another board to test it in. The basics I have right now is that my CPU will NOT FUNCTION with the "CPU Margin Enhancement" setting available in the BIOS - regardless of what value you give that setting. That, in my opinion, is unacceptable - as that Setting is available in all current, post 0803 BIOS releases by ASUS.

The valid argument here is: You are releasing & providing a BIOS that is crippling function of my CPU. Has it damaged my CPU permanently, I don't know! You need to prove it by providing me with a functional, current release BIOS that works with my CPU.

I must also stress... The Slow Degradation is deeply concerning. It would be quite a different story if there was a direct conflict of CPU Margin Enhancement with Q9450 and as soon as you flashed the BIOS, Boom! No Go!! However - the slow degradation points to some kind of chip damage. Again - no solid proof, but it's a reasonable theory.

And the numbers are growing. True was one of the few here - then I came into picture - and True knows some other people. All having different symptoms, different timelines, but all ending in the same conclusion - problems getting into Vista with any BIOS > 0803.

[truehighroller]

I just talked to my contacts boss as he was at lunch so, the plot thickens. I sent him the links to my youtube videos so he can look the issue in the face. I told him I think it has damaged my chip and would just like some sort of answer here as to what the next step is "nicely of course".

[Dalten]

OC is not even in the picture here. This is all on Stock. The CPU will NOT run on Stock on any BIOS > 0803. Only on 0803 is the CPU functional and I can boot into Vista.

If the CPU won't run Stock on an Official BIOS release greater then 0803, then yes, I definately have something to butt heads against with ASUS. With Intel, I'm not sure.

I don't have any concrete proof the CPU is damaged - I don't have another board to test it in. The basics I have right now is that my CPU will NOT FUNCTION with the "CPU Margin Enhancement" setting available in the BIOS - regardless of what value you give that setting. That, in my opinion, is unacceptable - as that Setting is available in all current, post 0803 BIOS releases by ASUS.

The valid argument here is: You are releasing & providing a BIOS that is crippling function of my CPU. Has it damaged my CPU permanently, I don't know! You need to prove it by providing me with a functional, current release BIOS that works with my CPU.

Shortly after I upgraded from 0803 to 1201, 39 hours into a Prime 95 Large FFT's all 4 cores failed within less than half an hour of each other. I was floored because I didn't change anything and while my temperature fluxuates in my home, it was pretty cool right when they failed.

I was about to jump on the whole "CPU Margin enchancement" thing but I learned that one of my sticks of RAM had gone bad. I couldn't run at stock with that one particular stick in the same slot as the other stick was working just fine in.

Long story short, have you tested your RAM to know it's OK? Who knows, maybe the board fried the RAM, I'm really, really surprised my RAM went bad. I've never had a stick go bad like that in 15 years of building my own computers and selling custom built PC's to others.