Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
GIGABYTE Latest Beta BIOS
Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by Lsdmeasap View PostAhh ya, you are right some do need more then others. Sounds like you have tested it all pretty well as you should have.
I have been told (By Gigabyte, not Intel) that 1.4-1.5 QPI/Vtt is perfectly safe so you should have nothing to worry about running it if you have to. Some chips even do require 1.45+ to do 200-201+ Blck, so you must just have gotten one similar to that. GIGABYTE does not officially recommend those settings of course, and they were only passed along to me on a personal Basis Per a question I had asked.
Well that makes me feel a little better. Thanks.
Wasn't too worried though, as I have ran my Q9450 at 1.4v VTT and 1.475v Vcore for almost a year now 24/7 (to get 3.8Ghz stable), which everyone thought was too high when that chip first came out, and now a year later, still no probs.Last edited by Lsdmeasap; 03-23-2009, 07:24 AM.RIG#1
980x @ 4.5Ghz 24/7 under water, dual rads
Vcore 1.4, VTT 1.35, ram 1.5
Gigabyte X58 UD9 mobo
590 GTX under water *700Mhz, 4000Mhz)
12GB of DDR3
1x Intel Sata3 SSD
4x ocz SSD's Raid 0
Strider 1500Watt PSU
all in a monster MOZART TX CASE (with 16 fans)
Winows 7 64 bit
http://s755.photobucket.com/albums/x.../980x and UD9/
RIG#2
Qi7 920 @ 4.2Ghz
vcore 1.45, fsb 1.4
XFX 5970
6GB if DDR3
5x 2TB HD's
850watt Antec PSU
all in a Antec 900 CASE (with 6 fans)
Antec HTPC Remote
Windows 7 64bit
http://s755.photobucket.com/albums/x...0 i7 920 HTPC/
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by Lsdmeasap View PostK, I will pass it along and should have a answer or their thoughts about it for ya next week.
When I asked about it, after the replied answer I gave you here, they also told me why the Engineers removed it. They said they did not want users damaging their CPU's which Kinda confused me, but I guess they of course would know better then I would. It sounded confusing to me because I would think NO limit could hurt a CPU more then the selectable limits, but maybe not?
Anyhow, ya I will pass along a link to them and see if the Engineers can either re-think there thoughts of removing the setting and maybe add it back in. Or if not, if any of the engineers would take some spare time and make you a newer BIOS with the settings enabled/visible..
Yeah, that doesn't really make sense to me (seeing that with TDP limit is part of Intel's design). But then, Im not an engineer either :P
Windows 7 Pro 64 | OCZ Vertex 120 | Cosmos S
Gigabyte P67A-UD5-B3 (F6) | Enermax Revolution85+ 1050w
i7 2600k | 2x4 GB Corsair Vengeance 1866 | EVGA GTX570 SC
Apogee XT | Magicool 360 Radiator | MCP35x Pump + v.2 Res
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by brugola.x View Post
All flashes were done with fail safe defaults loaded, and of course no overclock as I was about to copy my boot drive to a Raid 5 SAS array on the Perc... but
Any thoughts?Last edited by pjkenned; 03-21-2009, 07:01 PM.
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
I'm on the ex58-extreme with F6i and it doesn't let me upgrade to any other bios - md5sum's of the other bios's checkout so we got the q-flash bug still. On another note, I can't overclock f6i worth squat, I'm at only bclk=160 right now... I usually can attain 175 without any issue in the other bios' as well as much better memory timings. Please fix - I'd like to go to the rumoured well working f6f if nothing else...
ps qflash is only option for bios flashing as I run straight linux on this box.
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
In both cases, stock and overclock, I disable C1E and EIST, and enable Turbo Boost and I boot up with a 21 multi but when I resume from sleep the multiplier goes back to 20 and does not return to 21, not sure if this is a bug or not.
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by nevion View PostI'm on the ex58-extreme with F6i and it doesn't let me upgrade to any other bios - md5sum's of the other bios's checkout so we got the q-flash bug still. On another note, I can't overclock f6i worth squat, I'm at only bclk=160 right now... I usually can attain 175 without any issue in the other bios' as well as much better memory timings. Please fix - I'd like to go to the rumoured well working f6f if nothing else...
ps qflash is only option for bios flashing as I run straight linux on this box.
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by pjkenned View PostHow else can we flash bios if Q-Flash is not letting us?
-@BIOS -Windows
-FLASHSPI-DOS
and on the first page is note:
BIOS Flashing - A "How To ~ Qflash Guide"
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by shane_p View PostReally Gigabyte said 1.4-1.5 Vtt is safe?
Well that makes me feel a little better. Thanks.
Wasn't too worried though, as I have ran my Q9450 at 1.4v VTT and 1.475v Vcore for almost a year now 24/7 (to get 3.8Ghz stable), which everyone thought was too high when that chip first came out, and now a year later, still no probs.
What I was told is that 1.35-1.45+ QPI/Vtt is normal for some i7's to reach 180-200+ Blck since the QPI Bus goes so high, and that some even need 1.45+ to keep 200 Blck stable.
So it is all up to you, but of course always try to use the least amount needed.
Originally posted by pjkenned View PostI just flashed to f6i using Q-Flash. My Perc 5/i raid controller that was fine under f5f didn't work so I tried going back to f5f. I got the invalid file error above. I then tried to flash back to f5e,f,g and f6c, I got the invalid file on each of them. I tried downloading on XP, Ubuntu, and OSX onto three different flash drives, and nothing works. Just to double check, I also installed a second Perc 5/i I had sitting around and had the same issue and had the same issue also with no raid controller cards installed.
All flashes were done with fail safe defaults loaded, and of course no overclock as I was about to copy my boot drive to a Raid 5 SAS array on the Perc... but
Any thoughts?
You will have to use @BIOS or or DOS Based (AWDFlash/Flash895/FlashSPI) programs to flash backwards from the Newer F6 beta's until they get things worked out.Last edited by Lsdmeasap; 03-23-2009, 07:57 AM.
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by C3D76 View PostWow, that would really be great man :D. I understand you can't guarantee anything, but the effort is really appreciated.
The way I see it, this is a Win/Win situation for Gigabyte and it's customers.
Giving the Gigabyte board extra functionality, and giving the User more control...
Email sent, I will let you know the reply
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Hi to everyone
AND THANKS TO STASIO FOR ur updates on drivers & BIOS
My problem is
How can i decrease core1,core2,core3,core4 temps
my cpu temp is ok.The core temps r really high under stress and load
please tell any possible ans
thanks.......................
___________________________
___________________________
♥♥♥♥♥|~Prolima Megahalems~|VENOMOUS-X
|~Core i7 950~|180*23=4140MHz@1.250v 24x7
|~Gigabyte EX58UD5~|>EXt
|~Kingston KHX2000C8D3T1K3/6GX~|1800MHz 7-7-6-20 72 1t @ 1.60v
|~Zotac GTX470~|
|~CM Storm SCOUT~|
|~Seasonic M12D 850W~|
|~BenQ E2200HD~|
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Hi prasrig,
is your system under wather or air? Make sure your cooler is corectly mounted and take liquid metal from Coollaboratory - Liquid Metal! but watch for the install notes!
Turn HT off. And check minimum voltages for your cpu and other components. 3.8 gig make sometimes a huge differences in voltages and temp.Last edited by Rolfi; 03-23-2009, 12:32 PM.Intel i7 930 @ 4 GHz (3001A480) 36/16/8 200x20 @ 1,296 load / LLC LV 2
Gigabyte G.1Sniper (Bios F4b) - DDR3 PC1600 12GB Kit Sniper F3-128000CL7 @ 1600Mhz 7/8/7/24 T1
3x MSI 280GTX SOC @ 700/1500/1250
1x Real SSD 300 2x Intel X-M25 SSD Raid - 1250W Enermax - Win7 Ultimate 64
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
hi all, this is my first post after a while of reading only :P
i have EX58-DS4 wich had 6b for a while, i7 920 with a thermaltake ultra-120 extreme and was oced like this:
ht off
1,350 vcore
1,340 qoi/vtt
1,86 cpu pll
1,58 dram
1,18 qpi pll
191x21
for once, i would like to know whats safe for qpi pll, and what it really does, since i couldnt find that out.
and the real reason for this post:
is it posible that something changed on 6c that may be causing a bsod with code 0x000000F4 from time to time on a cold boot, and after that, the first reboot detects no boot device ? all was fine before (or so it seemed)
i have a raid 0 of 2 seagate drives on the intell controlet.
thx in advance
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by rcocchiararo View Posthi all, this is my first post after a while of reading only :P
i have EX58-DS4 wich had 6b for a while, i7 920 with a thermaltake ultra-120 extreme and was oced like this:
ht off
1,350 vcore
1,340 qoi/vtt
1,86 cpu pll
1,58 dram
1,18 qpi pll
191x21
for once, i would like to know whats safe for qpi pll, and what it really does, since i couldnt find that out.
and the real reason for this post:
is it posible that something changed on 6c that may be causing a bsod with code 0x000000F4 from time to time on a cold boot, and after that, the first reboot detects no boot device ? all was fine before (or so it seemed)
i have a raid 0 of 2 seagate drives on the intell controlet.
thx in advance
Safe? probably as EVGA X58's set their QPI PLL at 1.3v when left on AUTO, so I would assume 1.3v is quite safe. And ASUS X58's default to 1.35v QPI PLL, seems like my X58 Gigabyte undervolts it, when compared to others (1.1v stock)
btw
QPI PLL: I found this on a website reviewing an ASUS X58 mobo:
QPI/DRAM Voltage - 1.35V: This is poorly worded by Asus - it should read uncore or QPI/memory controller voltage or QPI/PLL Memory so not to confuse it with the actual memory voltage. Increasing this is also necessary as it helps overclock the base frequency as the uncore area overclocks increase in relation to the CPU core overclocks. This voltage is tied to actual DRAM voltage - the two are directly connected on the motherboard.
also from another site:
QPI/DRAM CORE VOLTAGE = QPI PLL VOLTAGE = QPI/PLL MEMORY CONTROLLER VOLTAGE = UNCORE MEMORY VOLTAGE
(is there any other variations out there?)RIG#1
980x @ 4.5Ghz 24/7 under water, dual rads
Vcore 1.4, VTT 1.35, ram 1.5
Gigabyte X58 UD9 mobo
590 GTX under water *700Mhz, 4000Mhz)
12GB of DDR3
1x Intel Sata3 SSD
4x ocz SSD's Raid 0
Strider 1500Watt PSU
all in a monster MOZART TX CASE (with 16 fans)
Winows 7 64 bit
http://s755.photobucket.com/albums/x.../980x and UD9/
RIG#2
Qi7 920 @ 4.2Ghz
vcore 1.45, fsb 1.4
XFX 5970
6GB if DDR3
5x 2TB HD's
850watt Antec PSU
all in a Antec 900 CASE (with 6 fans)
Antec HTPC Remote
Windows 7 64bit
http://s755.photobucket.com/albums/x...0 i7 920 HTPC/
Comment
-
Re: Gigabyte Latest BIOS
Originally posted by shane_p View PostQPI PLL, has something to do with Ram that is for sure, I could not get anything over 1700Mhz stable (overclocked from stock 1600Mhz) unless my QPI PLL is at least 1.3v
Safe? probably as EVGA X58's set their QPI PLL at 1.3v when left on AUTO, so I would assume 1.3v is quite safe. And ASUS X58's default to 1.35v QPI PLL, seems like my X58 Gigabyte undervolts it, when compared to others (1.1v stock)
btw
QPI PLL: I found this on a website reviewing an ASUS X58 mobo:
QPI/DRAM Voltage - 1.35V: This is poorly worded by Asus - it should read uncore or QPI/memory controller voltage or QPI/PLL Memory so not to confuse it with the actual memory voltage. Increasing this is also necessary as it helps overclock the base frequency as the uncore area overclocks increase in relation to the CPU core overclocks. This voltage is tied to actual DRAM voltage - the two are directly connected on the motherboard.
also from another site:
QPI/DRAM CORE VOLTAGE = QPI PLL VOLTAGE = QPI/PLL MEMORY CONTROLLER VOLTAGE = UNCORE MEMORY VOLTAGE
(is there any other variations out there?)
im under 1600 with sticks that are rated for 1600, so i dont really need that much (maybe), i cant get higher than 191 bclk without raising the qpi/vtt voltage (and/or vcore), so im stuck like i posted before (i dont want more tho...), and i had to raise the qpi/*vtt to what i said to be able to run uncore at the frecuency needed for the ram on 1570.
I also had to disable HT since i couldnt get past 180x20 with it on :P
my bsod might be related to some software problem, and not the bios change, if it appears again tomorow, it was not the soft i suspected :P
Comment
Comment