From: geoff on 7 Aug 2010 17:36 I ordered the MB, two sticks of DDR3 RAM, and an AMD Phenom II X4 965. I put it together using the case, HDDs, and DVD drives that I currently have. When I fired it up, I did not reinstall XP because I wanted to see what it would do. Surprisingly, XP came up and changed a lot of drivers. However, it took a long time for XP to come up. The logo would appear faded then eventually appear normally. The boot time was several minutes before the desktop appeared. When I had this issue before, it turned out that the CPU was not 100% compatible with the MB. Everything I bought for this build was on GigaByte's compatibility list. After some searching, I found others had the same issue of extended OS load times. I did two things to try and fix it, one is clear the CMOS, and secondly, I noticed the BIOS had a 'keyboard plugged into USB port' item. That was disabled, so, I enabled it since my mouse/keyboard are USB. The XP logo appeared normally after the BIOS message and the boot time from the first BIOS message to the XP desktop was about one minute. That load time did not change after reinstalling XP. My guess is before, with the longer load times, XP was doing port scanning. Still, 1 minute is a long time to load the OS. I did a build in the late 90s and used either win-nt or 2000 and after changing some options in the BIOS, the load time from BIOS to desktop was less than 15 seconds. So, the build is: ATI Radeon 5770 AMD Phenom II X4 965 G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 GA-790XTA-UD4 500GB SATA HD (2x) DVD SATA (2x) Win XP 32-bits .. . . but, I'm not impressed with it. I'll see what it does when I get back to some video editing with Adobe Premiere Elements. I have a feeling I won't be saying 'WOW!' though. Also, I expected the temperatures to be in the low 30s but today, a hot day, the MB and CPU are about 38c. I bought parts for a build one time at Comp USA, which a sales guy put together. I found out later that there was a thermal design point (TDP) mismatch. The MB had a TDP of 125w and the CPU was 140w. It was not a serious issue and the temperatures for the MB and CPU also were at about 38c. The above CPU is 125w and the MB TDP is 140w but it hasn't helped in keeping temperatures low. --g
From: geoff on 8 Aug 2010 00:16 > However, it took a long time for XP to come up. The logo would appear > faded > then eventually appear normally. The boot time was several minutes before > the desktop appeared. When I had this issue before, it turned out that > the > CPU was not 100% compatible with the MB. Everything I bought for this > build > was on GigaByte's compatibility list. After some searching, I found > others > had the same issue of extended OS load times. I did two things to try and > fix it, one is clear the CMOS, and secondly, I noticed the BIOS had a > 'keyboard plugged into USB port' item. That was disabled, so, I enabled > it > since my mouse/keyboard are USB. I disabled the 'keyboard plugged into USB port' item and the XP logo appeared normally, so, it seems clearing the CMOS fixed the above issue. I never had to do that before. > I did a build in the late 90s and used either win-nt > or 2000 and after changing some options in the BIOS, the load time from > BIOS > to desktop was less than 15 seconds. I doubt I'll be able to get the load time down to < 15 secs. With that old build, it was an ASUS MB and I remembering enabling some item that had to do with the bus. I was surprised at how fast the OS loaded afterwards. --g
From: Paul on 8 Aug 2010 03:41 geoff wrote: >> However, it took a long time for XP to come up. The logo would appear >> faded >> then eventually appear normally. The boot time was several minutes before >> the desktop appeared. When I had this issue before, it turned out that >> the >> CPU was not 100% compatible with the MB. Everything I bought for this >> build >> was on GigaByte's compatibility list. After some searching, I found >> others >> had the same issue of extended OS load times. I did two things to try and >> fix it, one is clear the CMOS, and secondly, I noticed the BIOS had a >> 'keyboard plugged into USB port' item. That was disabled, so, I enabled >> it >> since my mouse/keyboard are USB. > > I disabled the 'keyboard plugged into USB port' item and the XP logo > appeared normally, so, it seems clearing the CMOS fixed the above issue. I > never had to do that before. > > >> I did a build in the late 90s and used either win-nt >> or 2000 and after changing some options in the BIOS, the load time from >> BIOS >> to desktop was less than 15 seconds. > > I doubt I'll be able to get the load time down to < 15 secs. With that old > build, it was an ASUS MB and I remembering enabling some item that had to do > with the bus. I was surprised at how fast the OS loaded afterwards. > > --g It won't affect anything, but how "clean" is Device Manager, after your build was finished ? Are all the drivers present ? If the OS is WinXP, you can look in C:\WINDOWS\setupapi.log , to see hardware being discovered and drivers added to handle them. I have an "event" in there right now, where it looks like the OS just about "copy reinstalled" everything, on July 29. And I don't know what triggered that. The thing about the processor TDP, is whether the motherboard has a high enough Vcore maximum power output, to handle it. If you have a 140W motherboard, that means it can handle any AMD device that fits in the socket. A 125W processor would be within the power limit. The Vcore only provides as much current, as the processor will draw. For example, it might draw 100 amps at 1.25 volts. But the Vcore may be able to provide up to 140W/1.25volts = 112 amps, so there is some "headroom" of 12 amps there. There have been motherboard designs, with "weak" Vcore, only able to use 65W or 89W processors. And the CPU_Support list on the web site would tell you that. A motherboard with a "weak" Vcore, wouldn't run your Phenom II X4 965. I wouldn't be so quick to discount your purchase just yet. Your processor probably has a pretty good set of floating point units, and you may see some good render speed. Give the machine a chance. Paul
From: geoff on 8 Aug 2010 04:47 > I wouldn't be so quick to discount your purchase just yet. It is good in one way . . . I remember back in December of '95, my brother bought a Gateway and at the time, it was the fastest thing on the planet. By the summer of '96, it was a slow piece of ****. Intel would crank up the processor speed every so often (thanks marketing). Intel stuck with that strategy until PCs started to have a heat problem. Their skunkworks in Israel had the idea of adding cores. For the majority of folks, 4 or 6 cores is not going to do much since, as you pointed out before, most software is written for a single core. The only multi-core benefit one gets is general load balancing by the OS. So, machines won't be obsolete in six months, but, on the other hand, Intel and AMD have nothing new to offer. Maybe the aliens decided to leave Earth and they told Intel to come up with their own ideas. AMD will have an APU next year but I doubt it will blow anyone's socks off. What's next are cheap SSDs and more of the same for the other stuff (DDR4/5/6/etc. memory, ATI 6870/7870/8870/etc., 6/8/16 core CPUs or APUs) but no real change in technology. I think it will be a long time before we get to the M-5 computer that was on Star Trek TOS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rzGT7zgE8w --g
From: geoff on 8 Aug 2010 12:51 This kind of thing makes me think Intel has nothing new: http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/business-of-it/2010/08/05/intel-and-ftc-make-antitrust-compromise-40089742/?s_cid=938 Intel and FTC make antitrust compromise This sentence has me wondering if Adobe optimized Premiere Elements for Intel processors: '. . . Intel claimed better software performance on Intel CPUs than on competitors' CPUs, but failed to inform customers that Intel had designed its compilers to give Intel chips a performance benefit.' --g
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 Prev: You can get Internet from a USB port, can you get TV Next: What if I screw up??? |