Re: GA-VM900M 1.0 : No "Virtualization Technology" for a processor that supports it
Thank you guys.
I've made more tests here.
Flashed board from F4 to F6 BIOS and then Vcore was displayed as 1.248 (against 1.072 when using F4 BIOS).
When in full load (Intel Burn Test), Vcore was 1.182 (if I remember well).
But Gflops measured were like before: about 16
It means, with F4 BIOS, Vcore is below normal, and that's why BIOS shows Vcore FAIL
Noticed another problem in F6 BIOS though: SSE4.1 isn't supported, just like VT-x
Then, I've downgraded to F4 and so I'll remain.
The good news are I've tighten memory timings from 5-5-5-15 to 4-4-4-12, and machine PASSED through Intel Burn Test, but now with Gflops 17.
Also, MaxxMEM showed memory latency decreased by 10 ns, and average speed is now 5.03 Gb/s, against 4.91 Gb/s with default timings
Best regards
Thank you guys.
I've made more tests here.
Flashed board from F4 to F6 BIOS and then Vcore was displayed as 1.248 (against 1.072 when using F4 BIOS).
When in full load (Intel Burn Test), Vcore was 1.182 (if I remember well).
But Gflops measured were like before: about 16
It means, with F4 BIOS, Vcore is below normal, and that's why BIOS shows Vcore FAIL
Noticed another problem in F6 BIOS though: SSE4.1 isn't supported, just like VT-x
Then, I've downgraded to F4 and so I'll remain.
The good news are I've tighten memory timings from 5-5-5-15 to 4-4-4-12, and machine PASSED through Intel Burn Test, but now with Gflops 17.
Also, MaxxMEM showed memory latency decreased by 10 ns, and average speed is now 5.03 Gb/s, against 4.91 Gb/s with default timings
Best regards
Comment