SE + QX6700 + 4x1Go PC2-8500 + Vista 64

[ajdo]

Currently running:

QX6700: FSB 320 / 1280 / Multiplier x10

Mem: 5-5-5-5-2T 1066 1.95V / Anythinghigher than V1.97 Vista 64 does not start!

 

Run fairly stable, although once in a while system freezes

 

Any suggestions to be 100% stable

 

Thx

[DerekT]

I would drop the throughput with 4 DRAM banks populated. This is your source of instability and it is cumulative and degenerative. It very likely will get worse if you continue with those settings.

 

The memory controller can not keep up with the extra DRAM at the rated 8500 speed. You will need to drop the speed of the DRAM from 1066Mhz to 800Mhz. If you had purchased 4 X 1024MB of PC6400 (800Mhz) DRAM, then you would have had to drop to PC5300 (667MHz) DRAM, etc. 2 X 2048 will not issue this problem. This is a problem of all 4 banks being populated and it

 

Think of it this way. If you have a small phone book, then when you go into the index to find the page where you will find the phone number you are doing so at a certain speed due to the pages of the Index. Then you have to drive through the pages to get to the number. Now if your index is twice as large and the pages twice as many, then it takes longer to access and store/load the data. Now DRAM has a Strobe and the length of the strobe is how long the rows and columns can be left open before they must be refreshed. There is not enough time for the dram to be refreshed and then accessed with 4GB at the full access speed of the DRAM. The chipsets are optimized for 2GB, not 4GB and for 2 DRAM slots, not 4 DRAM slots populated. You can overclock the FSB (and hence the Memory Controller Hub = MCH) to gain some extra bandwidth and thus access the capabilities of the DRAM since the chipset is now clocked up. Usually when you clock up the FSB and concurrently the Memory Controller Hub (MCH) you need to raise the voltages of the CPU/MCH a bit as well.

[ajdo]

Thanks for your reply.. Already read the previous post with this response.

Using SE Bios 1305 I did as such:

4-4-4-12-2T

4-28-6-11-Auto-8-42-Auto

V2.1

 

and it seems to run well. (of course, only 800Mhz)

 

I Do not know enough about settings above to modify muself.

If I wanted to slowly push towards 1066 to find a fast stable confuguration, what setting should I use/change based on what I currently have above.

 

Thx

[DerekT]

This post will help you with this issue:

 

http://www.houseofhelp.com/v3/showthread.php?t=64360

[ajdo]

Thx for these info...

[DerekT]

Sure thing. Let me know if you have any issues with this and I can help you customize the settings.

[ajdo]

If I understaood the 4x1Go 1066 issue, does this mean 2x2Go 1066 would work better?

[DerekT]

There will be far less issues to deal with at 2 X 2048MB. The overclock is always a YRMV and the 2 X 2048 is far more assured. However, with the overclock, the 4 X 8500C5's have a good chance on a higher throughput simply because there is no 2 X 2048 with 8500C5.

[ajdo]

lol... thx

Other question if you do not mind:

I suppose the 4x1GO issue is linked to all PCB/chip manufacturers. However, I know of people who overlooked other brands, better/more stable than what I can do with my current configuration (4x1Go PC2-800):

 

-Asus Striker Extreme

-Qx6700 FSB 320

-Other Brand 4x1Go 6400 at 1066

Stress tested with no errors!

Knowing the SE has FSB limitation with QX6700. Known problem with 680i, solved by EVGA but not Asus yet.

 

I have read something about "micron D9GMH" chip being better for the SE.

1- Does that make sense? Could a certain chips overclock certain motherbopard better?

2- Reading your preview link on memory, I think I understood running Corsair 6400 would have worked the same/not better than 8500 in the configuration above. Is that correct?

 

Thx again and sorry for thosem straight to the point, questions...

[ajdo]

Forgor to add: was NEVER able to run 2 or 4 x 1Go PC2-8500 at any power with 2.1V. Windws never starts. Runs best in my configuration at 1.95V or 1.97V...

[DerekT]

Do you have an IM messenger (ICQ/MSN/AIM/Yahoo? If you do please pm me with your messenger.

[ajdo]

Hi - Unfortunately I do not …

However, I would like to correct my assumptions and answer my own questions.

A user on Asus forum shared a great “how to OC Quads" thread. In an hour’s time I had the following results:

SE+QX6700+Corsair 4x1Go PC2-8500 -> 1066/343 -> Stable + Stressed tested 3 hours. Will stress longer in a few days

Meaning, it’s not the components that do not work well, it’s the users that makes mistakes in OC settings.

I would like to add, as much as your thread on memory speed is theoretical correct, there are way to get around those limits while Ocing. Had mentioned previously users with other brands had achieved 1066/320 with SE+QX6700. Now I can say Corsair work as well … maybe better, time will tell.

For those interested in settings:

http://vip.asus.com/forum/view.aspx?id=20071120220310843&board_id=1&model=Striker+Extreme&page=1&SLanguage=en-us

 

Forgot to add: Vista index 5.9

 

 

Thank You very much for your help/support...

[DerekT]

There are way to get around those limits while Ocing.

 

You will note that in my post I told you this.

 

You can overclock the FSB (and hence the Memory Controller Hub = MCH) to gain some extra bandwidth and thus access the capabilities of the DRAM since the chipset is now clocked up. Usually when you clock up the FSB and concurrently the Memory Controller Hub (MCH) you need to raise the voltages of the CPU/MCH a bit as well.

[ajdo]

Yes I agree, but you know, “people” have a tendency reading/remembering only what they wish to read/remember.

By the way... memory set at 1.95v in bios.

1.97v would also work but on SE, better use lowest mem voltage value.

Anything over 1.97, Vista 64 doe not start.

Cheers and thx again

[DerekT]

“people” have a tendency reading/remembering only what they wish to read/remember.

 

Indeed. :D:

 

Good luck and let us know if you have any issues. My advice is to keep that DRAM cool. If you run it with 4 X 1024 at 1066 then it is preferable to keep the dram cooler than if you run 2 X 1024 at 1066. Check your Northbridge/MCH thermals as well. Heat issues are cumulative and degenerative and have a tendency to damage the system with time.

 

Good upon you to use the low Vdimm. Check every month or so on Memtest is my advice.

[ajdo]

- What temps do you suggest idle/underload?

Are CORSAIR CMXAF1 Fans adequate or should I just push a 80cmm fan on front of the ram?

 

Thx

[RAM GUY]

With 4 modules yes you should use the Memory Fan but I don't know that you would need to add another fan besides that one. Memory will run much otter than the system would and there is no easy to test the temp of the memory.

[ajdo]

There will be far less issues to deal with at 2 X 2048MB. The overclock is always a YRMV and the 2 X 2048 is far more assured. However, with the overclock, the 4 X 8500C5's have a good chance on a higher throughput simply because there is no 2 X 2048 with 8500C5.

 

------------------

Since my last post I am seeing on Corsair website:

- 2x2048-8500C5

and

- QUAD2X4096-8500C5DF

 

Would these be a better choice to install instaed od 4x1Go PC28500C5?

Out of the 2 which would be more stable at 1066?

 

Thx

[DerekT]

------------------

Since my last post I am seeing on Corsair website:

- 2x2048-8500C5

and

- QUAD2X4096-8500C5DF

 

Would these be a better choice to install instaed od 4x1Go PC28500C5?

Out of the 2 which would be more stable at 1066?

 

Thx

 

I would go with the 2 X 2048-8500C5 but they are very hard to find. If you can not find them, I would then go with the 2X2048 @ 6400C5DHX. Quad setups can be problematic and very dependent on the motherboard's ability to accept them and handle an overclock with them. With four DRAM slots populated you would very likely have to drop the 8500 (1066MHz) DRAM speed to 6400 (800Mhz) and then work on an overclock to attempt to regain the lost bandwidth from populating all four DRAM slots.

[ajdo]

Thx.. makes sense based on you past responses.

 

If I understand your reasoning correctly, the problem resides when 4 banks on memory are installed.

Could you give me your opinion on the QUAD2X4096-8500C5DF

Apart from the availility, would 1xQUAD2X4096-8500C5DF work as well as 2xQUAD2X4096-8500C5DF or 2x2048-8500C5 or 2x1066-8500C5 at 1066 since only 1 or 2 banks on memory are being used?

 

Ajdo

[DerekT]

Thx.. makes sense based on you past responses.

 

If I understand your reasoning correctly, the problem resides when 4 banks on memory are installed.

Could you give me your opinion on the QUAD2X4096-8500C5DF

Apart from the availility, would 1xQUAD2X4096-8500C5DF work as well as 2xQUAD2X4096-8500C5DF or 2x2048-8500C5 or 2x1066-8500C5 at 1066 since only 1 or 2 banks on memory are being used?

 

Ajdo

 

Any Quad products are 4 X 1024MB modules. It's a bit hard to give a fully concrete answer to your questions. It's a bit of YMMV. I have taken 4 X 1024 of 8500's to 1066MHz with an overclock on ASUS P5K mainboards based on the P35 chipset. There are others who have and yet others who can not. Now some of it may well be user error on the overclock. That's where the difference lies. It is far easier with 2 X 2048 of 8500C5's to make 1066MHz and not need an overclock with a motherboard that recognizes 1066Mhz DRAM. With 4 sticks of DRAM, it's a throw of the dice and on more than a few points.

 

If the board works well with four DRAM banks populated. Some boards are problematic with four DRAM banks and need to be RMA'd. Some boards are wonky with four DRAM banks populated and will not make the full speed of the DRAM regardless. Some will. It's quite frustrating because you can take two motherboards of the identical model and revision. One works well and one need RMA because only three DRAM banks will work, etc. etc.

 

Then again, you could gain an easy overclock and the DRAM makes ~1066Mhz with four DRAM banks populated.

 

I wish I could be more concrete and say, "Yes, with this you WILL be fine but hardware can be problematic, and even more so when you move to the higher end of hardware.

 

If you want to have the least possible problems, a good CPU FSB overclock and still have more than enough bandwidth, then I personally advise 2 X 2048. I doubt if you can find the 2048C5's though. They are so hard to make but even 2 X 2048 of 6400C5's are better than 4 X 1024 of 8500's in my view. Less possible issues will arise with the 2 X 2048.

 

I have a very fast system and I game with all the latest. I am playing Crysis right now and I am using 2 X 1024 of 8500C5. I dual boot with XP and Vista 32.

 

Seems enough for me.

[ajdo]

Thx again for insight.. Aside from games where 2 Go are suffficient, I agree, I use Cad sofware work wise hungry for Ram.

Will wait until 2x2048-8500C5 are available.

I guess if 2x2048-8500C5 are not available, no need to ask about QUAD2X4096-8500C5DF avalabilty for now...

 

Cheers...

[DerekT]

Thx again for insight.. Aside from games where 2 Go are suffficient, I agree, I use Cad sofware work wise hungry for Ram.

Will wait until 2x2048-8500C5 are available.

I guess if 2x2048-8500C5 are not available, no need to ask about QUAD2X4096-8500C5DF avalabilty for now...

 

Cheers...

 

I understand. Let us know what you decided and how it worked :)