The Socket 939 Appreciation Club and Knowledgebase [Official] - Page 79 - Overclock.net

blitz6804 · 03-03-08

The question I have: who is really the RAM God?

GuardianOdin running his DDR 500 at DDR 584?

Or Poser being the first in the thread to not only get 4x1024 DDR 400 to run as marked, but instead, run it at DDR 486!

The second I get my motherboard back I am going to be trying the fixes Poser posted (if available to me) that I can finally have my RAM running as they should be. The question is, if they work that fast, is it better to be 1:1 with a 2.75 GHz processor, or be 2:1.66 with a 3.00 GHz processor... I doubt I can get the former (DDR 544), but the later may (haha) be doable (DDR 454).

Whatever the case, my hat is off to you Poser. If my MoBo was here, you still would have beaten me to the prize. *Adds to Rep.* Come on everyone, lets give him a big round of applause!

Half a cheer for Poser! Hip-hip HU! (Kudos to all who remember what game this is from.)

blitz6804 · 03-03-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by txtmstrjoe

vwgti actually turned me on to a modded BIOS for this board (A8N32-SLI Deluxe) that worked really well for him (he's got the same RAM and board) which added the needed BIOS options to cure that 3-D instability, but I've never flashed to that modded BIOS.

Maybe I'm too pioneer chicken..?

Discretion is the better part of valor txtmstrjoe. Believe me, if I could do it again, I never would have touched the BIOS. On the other hand, since the BIOS is blanked, it finally encouraged me to send it for repair rather than tolerating its quirks.

BUT THE POINT STILL STANDS!

Only touch the BIOS if you are willing to go more than a month without the Motherboard. If you do not have another computer *dies laughing* then I certainly would not consider it. If you have a RAID, back up all your data before attempting it just in case it does die. That is the worst part for me. I never got around to backing up the data once I got the new laptop. I always have my laptop running a copy of everything the desktop has and vice versa, but after two months of having the laptop, I was still too lazy to do it. Now look where I am...

I just hope to hell the repaired (new?) motherboard will still be able to read my RAID 0, or I am totally ........

Poser · 03-03-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by timxirish

Heh, right on. Sadly I won't be tweaking until I can boot back into Windows (just a preference).. Went from single core to dual core.. I should have known that would cause problems with XP. It's funny, because I made it into XP on my first boot with it. Problems occured after a ballon notification came up, stating that it found the second core of my CPU and needed to reboot from the hardware changes. Then I can't boot into XP, and it's time to reinstall. Fedora 8 had no problem with a second CPU.

...And they say dual boot machines are more trouble than they're worth.

TIM, you definitely need to check this out, XP needs an MS hotfix and AMD drivers to properly utilize a dual core CPU.

Hope that helps

@blitz, thank you sir for your kind words. Still trying to push the envelope...will let you know results (10+ hrs prime stable)

MjrTom · 03-03-08

Here is my offering: http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=163978

My system spec rig clocked to 3.1GHz on air

blitz6804 · 03-03-08

Nice Poser... I think it is about time to upgrade your sig rig now, although, I am not trying to jinx you.

And timxirish, I concur with Poser. I have had a dual-core in my XP system for over a year, and the drivers/hotfix make it as stable as a single-core.

As to Vista: supposedly only Ultimate supports a dual-core processor. All versions of Vista will use dual-cores for their applications, but only Vista can run dual-core for Vista itself. The real kicker is: the feature is turned off by default! I turned it on (and shut off GUI boot) to cut boot times on my laptop from 3 minutes to about 90 seconds. To wit:

<Windows Key> + <R>
Type "msconfig"
<Enter>
Click "Continue"
Click the "Boot" tab
Check "No GUI Boot"
Click "Advanced options..."
Check "Number of Processors"
Select the number you have from the drop down menu
Click "Ok"
Click "Ok"
Windows will tell you to reboot, do so
Upon restarting, you will see "Windows has blocked some startup programs"
Right-click and select "Run blocked programs > msconfig"
In the window that pops up, check "Do not run msconfig at startup"
Click "Ok"
Enjoy your new-found speed.

I do not know if anyone else here has Vista and noticed it being sluggish, but just in case, you have the above information. Note please, even with the fix, Vista is still slower than Experience.

GuardianOdin · 03-03-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by blitz6804

The question I have: who is really the RAM God?

GuardianOdin running his DDR 500 at DDR 584?

Or Poser being the first in the thread to not only get 4x1024 DDR 400 to run as marked, but instead, run it at DDR 486!

The second I get my motherboard back I am going to be trying the fixes Poser posted (if available to me) that I can finally have my RAM running as they should be. The question is, if they work that fast, is it better to be 1:1 with a 2.75 GHz processor, or be 2:1.66 with a 3.00 GHz processor... I doubt I can get the former (DDR 544), but the later may (haha) be doable (DDR 454).

Whatever the case, my hat is off to you Poser. If my MoBo was here, you still would have beaten me to the prize. *Adds to Rep.* Come on everyone, lets give him a big round of applause!

Half a cheer for Poser! Hip-hip HU! (Kudos to all who remember what game this is from.)

Poser for the win! I never had any luck with four sticks.

blitz6804 · 03-03-08

Maybe now you will Guardian? You certainly should try it.

And if not, perhaps you'd be willing to buy me two of the 2x1024 Mushkin Redline DDR500s.

Please? Its only $380, and I would send you some of the RAM I have. (EDIT: I found a place I've not heard of before, AxionTech, who would sell me the same thing for only $340... can I have your wallet now? LOL)

Side bar: Buffalo weather is almost as strange as the Long Island weather I grew up with. We got about six inches of snow over the past week. Today, it is 60º F (15.5º C for the metrically inclined) outside! What makes it all the more confusing is that tonight is supposed to be 29º F (-1.6º C) with sleet going into tomorrow. Fun times...

**thlnk3r** · 03-03-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by blitz6804

<Windows Key> + <R>
Type "msconfig"
<Enter>
Click "Continue"
Click the "Boot" tab
Check "No GUI Boot"
Click "Advanced options..."
Check "Number of Processors"
Select the number you have from the drop down menu
Click "Ok"
Click "Ok"
Windows will tell you to reboot, do so
Upon restarting, you will see "Windows has blocked some startup programs"
Right-click and select "Run blocked programs > msconfig"
In the window that pops up, check "Do not run msconfig at startup"
Click "Ok"
Enjoy your new-found speed.

Blitz, good suggestion for the No GUI Boot. I've had that option checked in my XP install for a while. I think it cuts off like a second or two for my rig