Printable View
MINI UPDATE:
Well, I haven't heard anything more from Epox yet, but it's only Monday.
As a disappointing side note, I've had to drop my ram from 180 to 175mhz. Planetside kept kicking me out with it that high. Seems more stable at 175mhz.
My RMA Kingston should be here this week, but as of right now it's STILL on back order. Very irritating.
If and when it gets here, if it's not any better or we haven't heard of a fix by them, prolly gonna sell this and go for corsair :(
While reading thru Rojakpot's BIOS Guide, I came across this interesting information under the Memory Subsystem. While this may be old news to some, and may not have anything to do with the problems being currently experienced, I thought it worthwhile enough to give those experiencing problems a heads-up:
SuperStability Mode
Common Options : Enabled, Disabled
Details
This is a NVIDIA nForce chipset specific BIOS feature. It controls the hitherto hidden "feature" of the nForce chipset which locks the memory clock at 200MHz, instead of the usual 266MHz; if it detects that the memory module is not compatible with the motherboard. This allows the use of substandard or incompatible memory modules, albeit at reduced performance.
At boot-up, the nForce chipset reads the SPD values from each DIMM to detect its rated speed, timings as well as size. This is where the SuperStability feature kicks in. The chipset will only allow the memory clock to be set at 266MHz when it is satisfied that each and every DIMM installed has met its standards. If even a single DIMM fails to meet the standard, the chipset will lock the memory clock at 200MHz, irrespective of the actual clock speed it is set to run at. Even if you manually attempt to run it at a higher speed, the memory clock will remain locked at 200MHz.
While NVIDIA claims it is a feature that allows nForce motherboards to be used with substandard or incompatible memory modules that would otherwise be unusable, there have been reports that even compatible DIMMs are being locked down to 200MHz. Apparently, loading the second slot (Slot B) of the second memory controller with a double-sided DIMM will also cause SuperStability to kick in.
As you know, the NVIDIA nForce is the first chipset to offer a dual-channel DDR interface, albeit with only three DIMM slots. NVIDIA arranged it so that the first DIMM slot has a memory controller all to itself, while the second and third DIMM slots have to share the second memory controller. It is the second slot of this second memory controller that is not compatible with double-sided DIMMs.
However, it is not clear if this is due to the slot not being rated for double-sided DIMMs or a bug in the chipset. What is clear is that if a double-sided DIMM is inserted into the second slot (Slot B) of the second memory controller, it will cause the SuperStability feature of the nForce chipset to lock the memory clock at 200MHz.
Please note that the Slot B of the second memory controller is not necessarily the third DIMM slot. It can vary from motherboard model to motherboard model. So, the only way to identify Slot B of the second memory controller, is to test it yourself.
After this feature was discovered by Chris Connolly of GamePC, the BIOS was revised to include this SuperStability Mode feature. This allows you to enable or disable the SuperStability feature. When left at the default setting of Enabled, the nForce chipset will lock the memory clock at 200MHz if it detects an incompatible memory module. If you disable this feature, the DIMM will be allowed to run at the clock speed you set.
It is highly recommended that you disable SuperStability Mode for better SDRAM performance, especially if you use all three DIMM slots. There's really no real need to enable it since you can lower the memory clock speed yourself or increase their timings in order to use incompatible DIMMs.
It seems that Mushkin 3500 (using winbond BH-5) has the best chance of hitting 220+ on the nforce2 A1's. I think that's what I'll replace my HyperX with.
Please post back with how Mushkin works. Good Luck.
Interesting read, I didn't know that. I don't think it pertains to our issue though as we can all get over 100mhz (200DDR), so nothing is locked down. Plus we've all tried manual settings instead of using SPD. I've also tried different configurations in all the Dimm slots. The 8RDA+ 3402 bios doesn't even have that option, so I dunno.Quote:
Originally posted by BlueOval
While reading thru Rojakpot's BIOS Guide, I came across this interesting information under the Memory Subsystem. While this may be old news to some, and may not have anything to do with the problems being currently experienced, I thought it worthwhile enough to give those experiencing problems a heads-up:
SuperStability Mode
Common Options : Enabled, Disabled
Details
This is a NVIDIA nForce chipset specific BIOS feature. It controls the hitherto hidden "feature" of the nForce chipset which locks the memory clock at 200MHz, instead of the usual 266MHz; if it detects that the memory module is not compatible with the motherboard. This allows the use of substandard or incompatible memory modules, albeit at reduced performance.
At boot-up, the nForce chipset reads the SPD values from each DIMM to detect its rated speed, timings as well as size. This is where the SuperStability feature kicks in. The chipset will only allow the memory clock to be set at 266MHz when it is satisfied that each and every DIMM installed has met its standards. If even a single DIMM fails to meet the standard, the chipset will lock the memory clock at 200MHz, irrespective of the actual clock speed it is set to run at. Even if you manually attempt to run it at a higher speed, the memory clock will remain locked at 200MHz.
While NVIDIA claims it is a feature that allows nForce motherboards to be used with substandard or incompatible memory modules that would otherwise be unusable, there have been reports that even compatible DIMMs are being locked down to 200MHz. Apparently, loading the second slot (Slot B) of the second memory controller with a double-sided DIMM will also cause SuperStability to kick in.
As you know, the NVIDIA nForce is the first chipset to offer a dual-channel DDR interface, albeit with only three DIMM slots. NVIDIA arranged it so that the first DIMM slot has a memory controller all to itself, while the second and third DIMM slots have to share the second memory controller. It is the second slot of this second memory controller that is not compatible with double-sided DIMMs.
However, it is not clear if this is due to the slot not being rated for double-sided DIMMs or a bug in the chipset. What is clear is that if a double-sided DIMM is inserted into the second slot (Slot B) of the second memory controller, it will cause the SuperStability feature of the nForce chipset to lock the memory clock at 200MHz.
Please note that the Slot B of the second memory controller is not necessarily the third DIMM slot. It can vary from motherboard model to motherboard model. So, the only way to identify Slot B of the second memory controller, is to test it yourself.
After this feature was discovered by Chris Connolly of GamePC, the BIOS was revised to include this SuperStability Mode feature. This allows you to enable or disable the SuperStability feature. When left at the default setting of Enabled, the nForce chipset will lock the memory clock at 200MHz if it detects an incompatible memory module. If you disable this feature, the DIMM will be allowed to run at the clock speed you set.
It is highly recommended that you disable SuperStability Mode for better SDRAM performance, especially if you use all three DIMM slots. There's really no real need to enable it since you can lower the memory clock speed yourself or increase their timings in order to use incompatible DIMMs.
so what kind of fix is possible or is a fix even possible? i would like to be able to run dual channel and still overclock as i'm sure all of you do too. would it come in the form of a bios update or an nforce2 driver update? any ideas anyone, even hypothetically?
There has been speculation that a BIOS update could solve the issue, but I've seen nothing to back that up - it's just speculation. For now, all we can do is sell our HyperX and swap to other brands.Quote:
Originally posted by speedyaxon
so what kind of fix is possible or is a fix even possible? i would like to be able to run dual channel and still overclock as i'm sure all of you do too. would it come in the form of a bios update or an nforce2 driver update? any ideas anyone, even hypothetically?
UPDATE:
Well I was surfing over at aoaforums.com and noticed the Epox tech there posted a new beta bios, 3501. There's a nice long thread to it there, some people having better results, some worse. I didn't see any mention to HyperX issues.
Linky to bios:
http://www.aoaforums.com/forum/attac...&postid=177371
Linky to thread:
http://www.aoaforums.com/forum/showt...0&pagenumber=1
I haven't had a chance to play with it yet. If any of you guys wanna give it a go, remember it's a beta bios, so flash at your own risk!!!
Also, my RMA ram arrived yesterday. I will pick it up and test it tommorrow to see if I get any improvements, but I'm not holding my breath.
Biggest disappointment :(
Here goes my story. I purchased 2 sticks of HyperX PC3200 256MB yesterday and sadly couldn't get it worked with my 8RDA+. I got it booted to the desktop a few times successfully, but it would still freeze within a min or so. I tried here and tried that, but they're just like water and oil can't even mix together. Finally, I had no choice but to return them and of course got charged for that fxxking 15% restocking fee! Sigh, wut can I say?
After I got my PARTIAL refund, I went to another store and bought 2 sticks of Corsair PC3200 C2 256MB. I put them on and crossed my fingers and hoped it would work with my 8RDA+. Good news, it worked!! BUT FXXK I can't run them at fsb 200!!! Man, wut's wrong with Epox?!
Thanks to Epox, now I'm using the PC3200 ram in PC2700 speed. Epox'd better released a new BIOS to fix this, otherwise they're gonna lose another loyal Epoxer.
Updated to the beta 3501 and still no go. Any suggestion here?
Wish I had suggestions, but we've all tried everything. It's odd that your having corsair problems too though, they were supposed to have fixed that. Did you try the 3402 bios? Try that one.Quote:
Originally posted by Seventh Order
Updated to the beta 3501 and still no go. Any suggestion here?
UPDATE:
Another new bios released today. This one is official (i.e. Non-Beta). No mention of Hyperx Fixes, but hey, you never know.
http://www.epox.org/bios/8rda/8rda.zip
I'm gonna flash tonight when I get home from work + install my RMA ram.
oh man this is bad news
i know this is mostly problems with the dual channel
but is it dual channel 512? or is dual channel 256(2x256) still affected?
man, i wanted to put in my order for my entire rig today!
Both. More so for the 512 though.Quote:
Originally posted by Krelkor
oh man this is bad news
i know this is mostly problems with the dual channel
but is it dual channel 512? or is dual channel 256(2x256) still affected?
man, i wanted to put in my order for my entire rig today!
well
i plan on buying pc2700(333mhz)
so i would normally run at 166fsb
even if i did move up to 200fsb ram, i wouldnt notice a REAL WORLD difference in games eh?
i dont care about stats and scores, i could care less
i plan on getting a barton, so that runs at a 333fsb... so shoudl i even care that it cant run past 180mhz?
Quote:
Originally posted by janko10
Wish I had suggestions, but we've all tried everything. It's odd that your having corsair problems too though, they were supposed to have fixed that. Did you try the 3402 bios? Try that one.
I was using 3402 and obviously it didn't work. I've updated it to 3507 and still no luck. :(
If you are going to run stock (166 Mhz FSB) then I would say this memory is fine. I had no issues at 166 and I have not seen anyone else having problems at 166 (even in dual channel).Quote:
Originally posted by Krelkor
well
i plan on buying pc2700(333mhz)
so i would normally run at 166fsb
even if i did move up to 200fsb ram, i wouldnt notice a REAL WORLD difference in games eh?
i dont care about stats and scores, i could care less
i plan on getting a barton, so that runs at a 333fsb... so shoudl i even care that it cant run past 180mhz?
real world performance? HELL YEA fsb will give you the biggest bang for your buck because it not only increases ram / processor speed but it in creases the speed at which all the hardware can communicate between each other.Quote:
Originally posted by Krelkor
well
i plan on buying pc2700(333mhz)
so i would normally run at 166fsb
even if i did move up to 200fsb ram, i wouldnt notice a REAL WORLD difference in games eh?
i dont care about stats and scores, i could care less
i plan on getting a barton, so that runs at a 333fsb... so shoudl i even care that it cant run past 180mhz?
kirkyg
First of all you should have gotten pc 3500...could you post all your bios settings for your processor/bus/memory and all that. I'll compare it to how mine is set and tell you what you might try.Quote:
Originally posted by Seventh Order
I was using 3402 and obviously it didn't work. I've updated it to 3507 and still no luck. :(
kirkyg
Quote:
Originally posted by kirkyg
First of all you should have gotten pc 3500...could you post all your bios settings for your processor/bus/memory and all that. I'll compare it to how mine is set and tell you what you might try.
kirkyg
Sure, here you go~
System Performance [Expert]
CPU Clock ratio [12.5]
FSB Frequency [200]
CPU Interface [Aggressive]
Memory Frequency [83%]
Resulting Frequency [166]
Memory Timings [Expert]
T(RAS) [5]
T(RCD) [2]
T(RP0 [2]
CAS Latency [2.0]
Vcore [1.95]
Dimm [2.77]
I can run at these settings stable. But if I want to ran memory at fsb 200, I have to put CPU clock ratio to default. One thing though, when I put [SPD] in Memory Frequency, my memory timings become 8,3,3,2.5. Wut's going on here? I thought it's supposed to be 6,2,2,2? Did I miss something?
Anyway, I've decided to return them for 2 sticks of Corsair PC3500 256MB. I'll definitely keep you guys posted. So stay tuned.
First of all put your memory on 2.90 vdimm and leave it there. You will achieve best stability there...i confirmed this from instability at about 203 fsb @ 2.77 increase to stability at or above 210 fsb The corsair ram is good but its not overclock maniac like the kingston. It works though thats the thing (mine does atleast).
after you change to 2.90 vdimm then drop your fsb to 190 and drop your multiplier way down to rule out processor instability. Then set it to syncronous (100% of fsb speed) and start from there. Go up in 2-3 fsb and run prime 95 for 10 minutes a piece. Find out where you first get your error. Then you know you gotta drop it down about 3 fsb or so to get max stability. Try it out and post back.
kirkyg
Just returned these 2 sticks of XMS PC3200 256MB today. Insteading of getting XMS PC3500, I bought 2 sticks of HyperX PC3000 256MB. I thought it would be my safe bet, since a lot of people have had good experience with it. Anyway, I went back home and put them in. The system booted up with CPU and RAM both running at 190, so I kinda thought it wasn't too bad for the first try. Then I slowly raised the CPU and RAM, but still can't get to 200mhz. :( Right now, I'm running 12.5 x 195 with memory timings at 5,2,2,2 and Vcore 1.9. I'm gonna run prime95 for a while and see if it's really stable. If I don't get any errors, I'll bump to 13 x 195 Vcore 1.95.
By the way, don't talk about 200mhz anymore. I think my board just can't handle it. It's either a miss or hit and apparently it's a miss for me. I hope 8RDA3+ will do better this time.
Set your memory to 66% and then ramp the FSB up to 200mhz+ (just to test, it doesn't make sense to run your system like this). If it handles it ok and keeps going, then your board can definetly handle the FSB. We've tried this already, it's the ram that's holding it back.Quote:
Originally posted by Seventh Order
Just returned these 2 sticks of XMS PC3200 256MB today. Insteading of getting XMS PC3500, I bought 2 sticks of HyperX PC3000 256MB. I thought it would be my safe bet, since a lot of people have had good experience with it. Anyway, I went back home and put them in. The system booted up with CPU and RAM both running at 190, so I kinda thought it wasn't too bad for the first try. Then I slowly raised the CPU and RAM, but still can't get to 200mhz. :( Right now, I'm running 12.5 x 195 with memory timings at 5,2,2,2 and Vcore 1.9. I'm gonna run prime95 for a while and see if it's really stable. If I don't get any errors, I'll bump to 13 x 195 Vcore 1.95.
By the way, don't talk about 200mhz anymore. I think my board just can't handle it. It's either a miss or hit and apparently it's a miss for me. I hope 8RDA3+ will do better this time.
Quote:
Originally posted by janko10
Set your memory to 66% and then ramp the FSB up to 200mhz+ (just to test, it doesn't make sense to run your system like this). If it handles it ok and keeps going, then your board can definetly handle the FSB. We've tried this already, it's the ram that's holding it back.
I thought CPU and Memory had to be running in sync in order to achieve max. performance? And that's the reason why I upgraded my ram. Am I missing something? If I lower the memory timings, I'm pretty sure I can raise the CPU fsb to at least 210. Heck, I was running 205 x 12.5 Vcore 2.0 with my crappy Samsung PC2100 C2.5.
Yes, you get better performance, running your memory in sync.