The Corsair User Forums  

Go Back   The Corsair User Forums > Corsair Product Discussion > Memory

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 53 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #16  
Old 01-18-2007, 12:16 PM
mike123abc mike123abc is offline
Registered User
mike123abc's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8
POST ID # = 278758
mike123abc Reputation: 10
Default

Yes, mine will boot too (Vista 64 RC1) if I disable multicore operation in the BIOS on the first BIOS screen with the 1/11/07 BIOS.

Probably a problem that Intel has not released the VISTA support for all the device drivers.
Reply With Quote


  #17  
Old 01-19-2007, 01:48 AM
seanriddle seanriddle is offline
Registered User
seanriddle's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13
POST ID # = 278858
seanriddle Reputation: 10
Default

To help rule out a RAM problem, I tried just one of my DIMMs at a time in each of the slots, but BIOS 2431 blue screened in every case. If anyone has a method of informing Intel of this issue, please do.

Sean
Reply With Quote


  #18  
Old 01-23-2007, 05:58 PM
seanriddle seanriddle is offline
Registered User
seanriddle's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13
POST ID # = 279549
seanriddle Reputation: 10
Default

RAM Guy-

Does Corsair send its memory to CMTL for testing, or does it participate in Intel's Vendor Self Tested Memory program? No Corsair RAM is in either list for the D975XBX2. I got this reply from Intel:

Quote:
Ensure the brand and part number of the memory module(s) you are using are listed as compatible with the Intel(R) Desktop Board D975XBX2 (see both "3rd Party Tested Memory" and "Vendor Self Tested Memory" at http://www.intel.com/design/motherbd/bx2/bx2_mem.htm#1).

It's difficult to get them to look harder if they suspect it's a RAM issue.

Thanks-

Sean
Reply With Quote


  #19  
Old 01-25-2007, 01:17 AM
RAM GUY's Avatar
RAM GUY RAM GUY is offline
Corsair Product Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Fremont, CA
Posts: 118,268
POST ID # = 279902
RAM GUY Reputation: 10
Default

Quote:
RAM Guy-

Does Corsair send its memory to CMTL for testing, or does it participate in Intel's Vendor Self Tested Memory program? No Corsair RAM is in either list for the D975XBX2. I got this reply from Intel:
Answer: No only if there is a need, and we sent modules to Intel prior to their release of this chipset. They could not get DDR2 modules to develop the chipset or the people making them were limited.
And we have never provided our XMS modules to any OEM style MB maker as they would not qualify an over clocked part. But Chipset development is different the MB development. And our Qualification process is more detailed than any MB maker. So paying any MB maker thousands of dollars to qualify a part that will have a production life of 3-6 months is not worth it.

I know what we go thru when we develop memory and Intel in the chipset division knows us well. If you are having a problem its best to focus on the memory and the tested setting and limitation of the specific chipset and test the modules one at a time with www.memtest.org, but I have no problem replacing your modules if you want to try that, please use the On Line RMA Request Form and we will be happy to replace them or it
__________________
Support accounts and tickets can be created at https://support.corsair.com.
Reply With Quote


  #20  
Old 01-25-2007, 07:13 PM
mike123abc mike123abc is offline
Registered User
mike123abc's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8
POST ID # = 280036
mike123abc Reputation: 10
Default

Well newest Intel BIOS for BX2 out today, still no joy booting Vista RC1. Hope that Vista released next week will boot on it. I do not think it is the memory's fault since I am not over clocking at all, and even setting the clock slower (i.e. underclocking) to 400/533/667 did not make a difference.
Reply With Quote


  #21  
Old 01-25-2007, 07:35 PM
seanriddle seanriddle is offline
Registered User
seanriddle's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13
POST ID # = 280041
seanriddle Reputation: 10
Default

Mike-

Intel sent me a reply last night, a few hours before BIOS 2507 was posted, that they were able to replicate my problem and the fix was scheduled for the next BIOS release.

You are just having problems with Vista 64-bit, correct? Vista 32-bit works fine for me.

Sean
Reply With Quote


  #22  
Old 01-25-2007, 08:14 PM
RAM GUY's Avatar
RAM GUY RAM GUY is offline
Corsair Product Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Fremont, CA
Posts: 118,268
POST ID # = 280057
RAM GUY Reputation: 10
Default

Sean
Thank you for taking the time to share that, and if you get a bios from them please post it for every one!
__________________
Support accounts and tickets can be created at https://support.corsair.com.
Reply With Quote


  #23  
Old 01-26-2007, 11:01 PM
mike123abc mike123abc is offline
Registered User
mike123abc's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8
POST ID # = 280297
mike123abc Reputation: 10
Default

Yes I have only tried the 64 bit Vista boot. Glad to know Intel can replicate the problem. I hope they put out an update faster than the usual 1 month between bios versions.
Reply With Quote


  #24  
Old 01-31-2007, 08:21 AM
RobVista64_BSOD RobVista64_BSOD is offline
Registered User
RobVista64_BSOD's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10
POST ID # = 280919
RobVista64_BSOD Reputation: 10
Unhappy Bug confirmed on my machine too.

I installed WinXP, Vista-32 Ultimate and Vista-64 from the MSDN in December on a D975XBX2 with a Core2 Duo Quad 2.66 (QX6700) without any problems. Each OS would multiboot and run just fine.

I flashed my bios in Jan to the latest version, ...2431... and continued using XP while I was waiting for the latest nVidia drivers to be released.

Yesterday I began installing nVidia's 8800 GTX drivers and had no problems under XP and Vista 32-bit. When I booted into my previously working copy of 64-Bit vista I got a BSOD. I was unable to get into safe mode so with a heavy heart I moved on to the next step. After performing the usual disk and memory tests I attempted to run a recovery from the Vista64 install disk.
Much to my horror the installer also crashed with the same BSOD when I booted from the very DVD I had already installed from!.



The only thing that had changed was the bios version I was using. The latest bios appeared to be the kiss of death to vista 64. I just found this forum and it appears we are all in the same boat. This is a major bug and I do not understand why intel did not catch this in there QA process. Now all versions of vista are out in the wild there should soon be MANY MANY people who hit this wall.

I hope this helps you guys to know that I can 100% confirm this bug is not a freak of nature but is very real and easy to reproduce.

PS

I am running my RAM by SPD ie at regular JDEC 800Mhz 5-5-5-18 and not 1066Mhz 5-5-5-15 that this ram is capable of. I am able to run WinXP and Vista32 all day and burn in the system with SiSoft Sandra, again with no errors. It just won't boot into Vista 64 any more...

Update: My Vista64 needed to be Activated within the next few days or it would go into uncooperative mode. Using a tip from this forum I disabled Core Multiplexing in the Bios and was able to boot into Vista64 once again, giving me enough time to go online and register my legal copy before my time was up.

I have now re-enabled the full quad core functionality but I feel VERY let down that Intel, who say they want to 'delight our customers'. Like the rest of you I am not that delighted at the moment, my first taste of 64-Bit computing is a rather bitter one.

Grrrr! I need to get this working.

Last edited by RobVista64_BSOD; 01-31-2007 at 04:14 PM. Reason: Added update.
Reply With Quote


  #25  
Old 02-01-2007, 06:27 PM
RobVista64_BSOD RobVista64_BSOD is offline
Registered User
RobVista64_BSOD's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10
POST ID # = 281253
RobVista64_BSOD Reputation: 10
Default Any News?

Has anyone had any feedback from Intel as to when we will get a new BIOS that works with 64-Bit Vista? I would have thought that with a problem this bad there would have been some sign of hasty activity, but all is silence...
Reply With Quote


  #26  
Old 02-01-2007, 06:40 PM
seanriddle seanriddle is offline
Registered User
seanriddle's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13
POST ID # = 281255
seanriddle Reputation: 10
Default

This is what I got on 1/29:

Quote:
Thank you for contacting Intel(R) Technical Support.

A new BIOS version for the Intel(R) Desktop Board D975XBX2 should also be provided shortly. Unfortunately, there is no estimated time of resolution.
Sean
Reply With Quote


  #27  
Old 02-01-2007, 09:24 PM
RobVista64_BSOD RobVista64_BSOD is offline
Registered User
RobVista64_BSOD's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10
POST ID # = 281289
RobVista64_BSOD Reputation: 10
Smile That sounds hopefull.

Thank you Sean,

I very much appreciate the update. The word 'shortly' makes a big difference as it makes me think this bug is being taken seriously rather than just blaming it on our rather fine RAM.

May I ask you guys a quick and possibly foolishly obvious question?

It looks like the Intel board ignores EPP information. From what was said in this thread am I right in assuming the D975XBX2 is not happy running 8500C5D RAM faster than than 800 Mhz?.

I can see how in theory going to 333 FSB , upping the RAM to 2.2v and droping the CPU clock multiplier from x10 to x8 would restore my memory to 1000Mhz which is not far off it's design speed of 1066Mhz. Assuming we get our BIOS sorted out is this a sensible thing to do or am I just asking for even more trouble?. This Intel motherboard makes me feel that I have bitten off more than I can chew.
Reply With Quote


  #28  
Old 02-01-2007, 10:39 PM
seanriddle seanriddle is offline
Registered User
seanriddle's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13
POST ID # = 281300
seanriddle Reputation: 10
Default

Rob-

My RAM doesn't support EPP, but I've been running faster than 800MHz with no problem.

Here's a post I made on LegitReviews:

Quote:
I can run 10x300 under 2333, but under 2507 I get the watchdog message, so I disabled it and the computer seems to be running fine. There are some settings that I could POST with 2333 that I can't with 2507, even with the watchdog off.

10x300 overclocks the CPU, FSB and RAM by 12 1/2%. So 3GHz CPU, 1200 MHz FSB and DDR2-900 RAM. I'm also pushing my RAM from 5-5-5-12 to 4-4-4-12 with no problems.

I've created a spreadsheet with tabs for different Processor Multiplier and Host Clock Frequency inputs. Each tab shows the 16 different combos of Reference Frequency and Memory Frequency, and the resulting CPU speed, FSB speed, ratio, and memory speed. Then I'm attempting to boot using 2333 and 2507, and measuring the memory speed.

BTW- this is all at stock voltages so far. I've got a QX6700.

It's kind of slow going, but I've found a few things. Setting Reference Frequency to 333 results in the same ratios as 266, resulting in the same memory speeds showing in MemTest86+ v.170 and CPUZ 1.38, but the actual MB/s are slower.

Using 10x266, the fastest setting for me is actually Reference Frequency 200, Memory Frequency 667. This overclocks the NB from 800 to 1066, and runs the RAM at DDR2-887. The actual RAM throughput is about 7 1/2 % better than the default RFreq of 266 and MFreq of 800. If you have faster RAM, you might be able to POST at RFreq 200, MFreq 800, which is DDR2-1066.

A few times when I was changing settings, the PC would give 3 long beeps, which indicates RAM error. I was unable to get to the maintenance BIOS settings when this happened, but I found if I held the power button in until it turned off, then pulled the power plug and pushed the power button to drain the remaining power, that I could then get into maintenance mode.

If your keyboard seems to lock up in the BIOS, try pressing and releasing the 2 ALT and 2 CTRL keys one at a time. It looks like sometimes a flag gets set, and the BIOS won't respond to ALT-arrow or CTRL-arrow. Pressing and releasing the keys resets the flag.

I also found that the System Memory Speed on the first BIOS screen shows the current speed. If you make changes, it isn't updated until you reboot. The System Bus Speed, which I assume is the NB strap, always displays 1066, regardless of the RFreq setting. The Overridden Processor Speed and System Bus Frequency Override (FSB speed) are updated immediately when you change the performance settings, although sometimes I notice they are not updated when I load custom defaults.
Reply With Quote


  #29  
Old 02-03-2007, 09:25 PM
RobVista64_BSOD RobVista64_BSOD is offline
Registered User
RobVista64_BSOD's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10
POST ID # = 281546
RobVista64_BSOD Reputation: 10
Question Clutching at straws...

Hi Folks,

I am still hunting for clues. I was just reading about the fixes that went into an older bios, 2395 from before Christmas. I know we have all flashed over the top of it but I noticed this fix:

"Fixed issue where Vista would hang during boot on systems with Atmel TPM if the TPM was enabled in BIOS SETUP."
See Link: http://xtremesystems.org/forums/show....php?p=1912430

I am guessing, perhaps wildly, that this is some sort of security/crypto related thing (Embedded Security Trusted Platform Module?? that windows my try to use and that the D975XBX2 has hardware support and perhaps Vista64 is trying to use it to protect it's kernel binaries when it boots/installs.

If the leter BIOS broke this feature can we just disable it?. If none of this makes any sense then please forgive me, I am clutching at straws.

Last edited by RobVista64_BSOD; 02-03-2007 at 10:05 PM. Reason: Fixed typos. I make many mistakes in the early hours of the morning.
Reply With Quote


  #30  
Old 02-03-2007, 10:33 PM
seanriddle seanriddle is offline
Registered User
seanriddle's PC Specs
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13
POST ID # = 281548
seanriddle Reputation: 10
Default

Rob-

I think most (all?) of the D975XBX2 MBs do not have the TPM. The older BIOSes include the options to disable it even if it is not installed.

I'm also not sure why disabling Core Multiplexing would help if that was the underlying issue.

I'm guessing my problem has to do with the added support for the Q6600, the non-Extreme quad processor.

Sean
Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.