Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel Motherboards › Asus Z10PE D16 WS Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Asus Z10PE D16 WS Owners Thread - Page 5

post #41 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by raminux View Post

It's not even in the instruction manual I have! Obviously the instruction manual is behind the BIOS updates. Actually, the 3204 bios I have in my system is quite different from the manual (in explaining bios settings). I hope they will update the instruction manual accordingly even though many options are not explained there. Since you mentioned OC, I just slightly overclocked my processors (to bclk 104). I haven't changed any other setting but wondering what turbo charger does. So far, it seems stable.
Asus Update utility under Windows 10, failed to update the bios. The user interface frequently hanged and once in a while, when I was able to click on 'update BIOS', it gave an error message that this is the wrong motherboard!!? It looks like I need to try the old style bootable DOS or, use Flashback.

I'd always use Flashback, less points of failure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jax7480 View Post

HI all.
I am recent owner of this board (the D16 WS model) along with dual Xeon E5-2630V4 cpus. Additionally I have installed an Intel 750 1.2TB SSD and a STRIX GTX1070.
My problem is that I cannot get normal 4K SSD performance.
In the previous motherboard that I had the Intel 750, I had around 33MB/s read and 170MB/s write 4K performance in AS SSD benchmark.
After moving the drive to the new motherboard with the dual Xeons, I only get 29MB/s read and 100MB/s write.
The OS is the same in both configurations (Windows 10 Enterprise) with the same firmware and driver for the Intel 750. I am pretty sure that this is because of a power feature in the BIOS (like C-states) but anything that I have changed didn't make any difference.

That is strange, the controller etc are all on board so you'd guess performance would be the same. My only guess would be QPI latency maybe, is the slot its in assigned to CPU1 or CPU2?
post #42 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScratchyBollix View Post


That is strange, the controller etc are all on board so you'd guess performance would be the same. My only guess would be QPI latency maybe, is the slot its in assigned to CPU1 or CPU2?

The problem is that I also have a Samsung SM961 installed, in another PCIExpress slot, at it also lacks 4K performance. The 4K64Thrd is fine, the sequential is fine, but the 4K is like half of what the drives are capable of.
This is the weird thing. I was thinking maybe is the OS, and will try to install Windows Server 2012R2 Datacenter today to see if anything will change, but I am pretty sure that it has something to do with the CPU power options in the BIOS.
post #43 of 422
Some external pictures of my system can be seen here:

http://www.overclock.net/t/806672/official-mountainmods-club/1470

If the link doesn't work, mine is post #1471. I'll soon post some internal pictures.
Edited by raminux - 8/5/16 at 8:34pm
post #44 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScratchyBollix View Post

Anyone know what the lock chipset setting specifically sets?

BIOS -> Intel RC -> Lock Chipset (Enable Disable)

Is that to disable OCing on "K" style processors or something else I should be aware of?

Found it
Quote:
Lock Chipset
Select Enable to lock chipset register tables and set the register tables to "read-only"
to prevent new data being written into the processor to ensure system security. This
feature is used in conjunction with the items: "Clear MCA," "VMX," and "Enable
SMX" for Virtualization media support. The options are Enable and Disable.

So no performance gains there.
post #45 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by jax7480 View Post

The problem is that I also have a Samsung SM961 installed, in another PCIExpress slot, at it also lacks 4K performance. The 4K64Thrd is fine, the sequential is fine, but the 4K is like half of what the drives are capable of.
This is the weird thing. I was thinking maybe is the OS, and will try to install Windows Server 2012R2 Datacenter today to see if anything will change, but I am pretty sure that it has something to do with the CPU power options in the BIOS.

Unfortunately, I cannot help much since I don't have your drives. However, my drives are performing as expected. Even the two SSD drives connected to the SATA ports on the motherboard are performing better than I expected. I have not changed any (power) settings in the BIOS that could explain this in a different way.

On another note, here are some pictures of my initial cooling configuration:


28786568391_69b16c3f9a_b.jpg

28577931010_9b69bfb841_b.jpg

28247627743_c14b42aa66_b.jpg

I could have used my older Scythe Mugen 3 coolers (which were smaller in one dimension) but I had a GAS attack to acquire and try the new Scythe Ninja 4 coolers. The Ninja coolers are huge. They indeed had a slight interference with each other but I still managed to install them (this explains why I prefer the size of huge motherboards like HPTX).
This was only my initial configuration since, I also generally prefer a push-in heatsink air flow. Later I changed to a different configuration. That will be shown in my next post.
Edited by raminux - 8/8/16 at 10:22pm
post #46 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScratchyBollix View Post

Its a misreading, ignore it.
Yeah, there are quite a few scary looking things when you pull up sensors in linux...

Anyone play with the OC? Everything I've tried resulted in lower performance both in realbench and in my normal work-loads under linux (2x2690v4 128G 2400).

A few odd things appear in dmesg:
[ 1.164234] [Firmware Bug]: ACPI: BIOS _OSI(Linux) query ignored
..
[ 5.320215] power_meter ACPI000D:00: Found ACPI power meter.
[ 5.320336] power_meter ACPI000D:00: Ignoring unsafe software power cap!

I am using bios defaults at this point with the latest bios as of 8/1 (I think another one came out today?)

That second one implies that linux might be overriding something Asus is doing? Which would explain why performance doesn't change. Though even in windows I found that playing with uncore and TDP targets just lowered clock rates even with good temps. Everything I did to goose one setting came at the expense of TDP throttling I am guessing.
post #47 of 422
Trying to lookup the changelog but the ASUS site appears to be grinding to a halt (their site has always let them down).


I've OC'd my BCLK up to 104.2Mhz, others have hit 104.88 but mine refuses to go near that. I noted that Uncore destroys performance, but it suggests there may be a SW way to set those bits. Im not sure there.

Silverstone M.2 Adapter works great. I'd recommend anyone using a 950 Pro or similar purchase one of them and not the "FOR SAMSUNG" you'll find on Amazon.
post #48 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScratchyBollix View Post

Trying to lookup the changelog but the ASUS site appears to be grinding to a halt (their site has always let them down).


I've OC'd my BCLK up to 104.2Mhz, others have hit 104.88 but mine refuses to go near that. I noted that Uncore destroys performance, but it suggests there may be a SW way to set those bits. Im not sure there.

Silverstone M.2 Adapter works great. I'd recommend anyone using a 950 Pro or similar purchase one of them and not the "FOR SAMSUNG" you'll find on Amazon.
It does indeed name the MSR/CSR there and seems to take a number between 16 and 26 (at least on these processors), so if you can get into the kernel, you could write it.

I only tried a few times since reboots require, some, er patience... but eveyrthing I did there produced slower overall performance. I can only assume its the TDP budget coming back to close the equation.

Right now I have a pretty mundane air cooling setup that is more than adequate for stock (mostly under 60C full thread/core load) - noctua dual tower 92mm fan, so I am not sure how much thermal headroom I really have.
Edited by cekim - 8/9/16 at 9:57am
post #49 of 422
Now the cpu fans are in push-pull configuration. They work well though. It wasn't perhaps necessary to replace the main chip's heatsink but I already had this and why not cooling much better than the stock heatsink. Moreover, I added some low and small profile heatsinks to larger onboard chips (last picture).

28255091513_f59a1d84cc_b.jpg

28585622870_7dee3c456d_b.jpg

28585622660_f040b24980_b.jpg

28255091253_b02692cc47_b.jpg

28255091033_9f98242468_b.jpg
Edited by raminux - 8/9/16 at 9:49am
post #50 of 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by raminux View Post

Now the cpu fans are in push-pull configuration. They work well though. It wasn't perhaps necessary to replace the main chip's heatsink but I already had this and why not cooling much better than the stock heatsink. Moreover, I added some low and small profile heatsinks to larger onboard chips (last picture).
Any temp data from your setup?

Here's my idle (and loaded below - 24C ambient):
coretemp-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
Physical id 0: +30.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 0: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 1: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 2: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 3: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 4: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 5: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 6: +24.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 8: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 9: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 10: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 11: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 12: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 13: +24.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 14: +24.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)

coretemp-isa-0001
Adapter: ISA adapter
Physical id 1: +32.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 0: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 1: +27.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 2: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 3: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 4: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 5: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 6: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 8: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 9: +25.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 10: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 11: +27.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 12: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 13: +27.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 14: +26.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)

Loaded:
coretemp-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
Physical id 0: +55.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 0: +50.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 1: +51.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 2: +52.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 3: +54.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 4: +53.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 5: +52.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 6: +51.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 8: +52.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 9: +52.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 10: +52.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 11: +54.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 12: +55.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 13: +54.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 14: +51.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)

coretemp-isa-0001
Adapter: ISA adapter
Physical id 1: +64.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 0: +59.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 1: +61.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 2: +61.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 3: +62.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 4: +60.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 5: +62.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 6: +60.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 8: +61.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 9: +60.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 10: +61.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 11: +63.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 12: +64.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 13: +63.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Core 14: +61.0°C (high = +93.0°C, crit = +103.0°C)
Edited by cekim - 8/9/16 at 10:00am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel Motherboards
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel Motherboards › Asus Z10PE D16 WS Owners Thread