RebelsHaven Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 I'm still hosting all BIOS's: http://www.lejabeach.com/DFI/dfinf3s939/dfnf3bios.html Even though I have flashed each and every download, you are flashing at your own risk! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladislav Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 I had an LSI SCSI card running in this board when I first got it and it worked fine. I have since removed it while I'm overclocking (too many restarts and the card takes forever to detect the drives etc.). I had the first item in the boot order set to Hard Drive and in Hard Drive boot order I had add-in card at the top. This was on the original BIOS, I havent tested the card since I flashed to 6/29. Edit: I should add that I had the card in the second from last PCI slot I had everything set up same way as you but my bios is 06/02. I tried every PCI slot, none worked. I might try to flash it today. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major_PITA Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Went to the 629 bios and all seems well. Still need the math fixed for the vcore settings and my cold boot/reboot problems have been more intermittant, mostly boots OK. Had those boot issues on the early NEO2 bioses as well. Up to 273X100 !1.96 vcore or so CPUZ thinks (Vcore wise) and the 629 bios reads the temp a few degrees lower...or my ceramique is settling in! Looks like the NEO2 is going on EBAY!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGuy Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Went to the 629 bios and all seems well. Still need the math fixed for the vcore settings and my cold boot/reboot problems have been more intermittant, mostly boots OK. Had those boot issues on the early NEO2 bioses as well. Up to 273X100 !1.96 vcore or so CPUZ thinks (Vcore wise) and the 629 bios reads the temp a few degrees lower...or my ceramique is settling in! Looks like the NEO2 is going on EBAY!!! 1.96v!!!????? What do you have it set at in bios? All monitoring software (mbm5, smartguardian, cpu-z and cbid) have shown "under" actual settings. did you transpose? 1.69v????? Cuz if it's really showing 1.96 you are pumping way too much voltage through there!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major_PITA Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Can't type!!!!!! It's really1.69 VCore!LOL Glad someone's awake! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major_PITA Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 SHould have posted, my Vcore settings to get that are 1.5 +.4, somehow that ends up at 1.69 as far as Sandra or CPUZ can read!! Hence my comment abou the Vcore math. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RebelsHaven Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 I measured both Vcore and Vdimm using a Digital Multi-Meter. The resistor "R716" is still on my board. CPU's with other then a Venice core may give different "Default" voltages. Running the "705" BIOS has not changed the readings. On the left of the "=" is the BIOS setting. On the right of the "=" is the actual DMM reading. Several Vcore settings were not checked because the Vcore to my Venice would be too high. Here's what I got. : DFI nF3 Ultra-D 602 Bios Venice 3200 Vcore: Default = 1.34V CPU VID 1.50 = 1.44V CPU VID 1.55 = 1.50V Default +.1 = 1.38V Default +.2 = 1.46V Default +.3 = 1.51V Default +.4 = 1.63V Default +.5 = 1.67V Default +.6 = 1.76V Default +.7 - No Thanks! 1.55V +Default = 1.50 1.55V +.1 = 1.54V 1.55V +.2 = 1.64V 1.55V +.3 = 1.69V 1.55V +.4 = 1.83V 1.55V +.5 - No Thanks! 1.55V +.6 - No Thanks! 1.55V +.7 - No Thanks! Vdimm: 2.5V = 2.58V 2.6V = 2.69V 2.7V = 2.80V 2.8V = 2.91V 2.9V = 3.00V 3.0V = 3.10V 3.1V = 3.16V 3.2V = 3.17V Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGuy Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 @ rebelshaven - Yuppers! I printed this out days ago so I can use it for reference. I've only just recently graduated to checking the voltage on the psu rails they won't let me poke around the motherboard just yet with live probes at the mental institute....hehehehehehehehehehehehheeeeeeee Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RebelsHaven Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 It's very tight quarters to get in to both measurement points, especially when shaking like a leaf! :shake: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
omniman Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 1. Some memory modules haven't been recognized, so no booting possible. 2. Booting with HAT 1000 MHz (5*200MHz) is not possible, 4*200MHz is possible. 3. After installing the NVidia drivers, the booting takes about 3-4 minutes, in more than 70% the computer reboots on and on. 4. Problems when choosing different SATA ports. 5. Software shows chipset as Nvidia 250Gb and not nF3 Ultra. 6. The voltages are not correct (The board is undervolting a lot). Ok I have run a few test here with a NF3 Ultra-D with BIOS version 06-02-05. My config was: 1 x A64 3000 Venice. 1 x PC 4000 OCZ PC 4000 memory. 1 x Zalman 300 watts. 1 x ATI 9700Pro. 1 x 7200rpm Seagate HD In this case I didn't run into any problems and I have the following comments to offer on the 6 points you mentioned. 1: It is known that this board does have a few memory compatibility issues. Especially with regards to overclockers memory (that above DDR 400) 2: I adjusted the HT from 4 to 5 as you mentioned and didn't have any problem booting the board, I also adjusted the memory from the 2T setting to 1T and didn't run into any trouble. I beleive that the problems you encountered at this point were due to memory incomp as stated in issue 1. 3: Again I believe this a symptom of the memory incomp issue. 4: This problem I didn't notice 5: Please relate the name of the software you were using. Note however that the findings of 3rd party software are not considered relevant as they often give false reading due to not being specifically tuned to the board in question. 6: Again I assume that this is thru the 3rd party software as the Venice CPU I used was 1.29v in the MB BIOS which puts it within the norm. In summary I believe most of the problems to be stemming from memory incomp issues, so that said please advise customers encountering instability issues to stick to A-Brand DDR 400 max. Lastly I have received word that a new BIOS will become available shortly. I will pass it to you when I receive it and you may give it a try. (At this moment I'm not sure what fixes it contains) Regards Wendell Smith Technical Engineer DFI Technical Support, Europe Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoot Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Hi All, Forgive me if this is posted in the the wrong area, however I have a quick question. Given all the problems folk are having with this board am I correct that these difficulties stem from overclocking? That if used at "stock speeds" this board functions properly? It's my understanding that this is "the" board to get for the NF3 Chipset, and I would like to buy it, if it is in fact stable. All help provided is greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time & patience. I came from an MSI Neo2 Platinum and despite it also having a bios quirks like the NF3 Ultra-D, it was much more stable using the San Diego core, not to mention it overclocked better than my NF3 Ultra-D. If I had it all to do over again, when my ATI Radeo 9800xt died, I should have immediately said forget it and gone to an equivalent PCI-E video card. Then I would be using an NF4 based motherboard instead of these NF3 based ones. Both love my Winchester 3200+. but throw in the San Diego and they have issues. Whether they can be resolved by a simple bios change, or whether it's going to take a new revision, is anybody's guess. I'll be sorely pissed if I'm orphaned like Abit did to the KT7 owners and IWILL did to the KK266 owners. I got burned by both of those boards.I'm a patient man, but I used a lot of it up waiting for MSI to get the Neo2 straightened out. I feel foolish now for jumping on this NF3 Ultra-D, based upon how well the NF4 worked. I honestly find it hard to believe that DFI ever tested this board with a San Diego, given the issues I've encountered with the combination. MSI I can forgive. The Neo2 Platinum was out before the San Diegos were shipping. This wouldn't be such a "bitter pill" if I hadn't (also foolishly) decided to shell out a lot of extra money to get the San Diego, with the assumption that it would be a real treat to once in my life own a high-end processor. I'm a working stiff like many of you and I'm starting to feel that buying this NF3 Ultra-D was the equivalent to "throwing good money after bad". Those of you who knowme from Overclockers.com, know I'm not technically inept, nor some spoiled whiner. I'm just at wits end! :mad: Hoot Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaigas Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 To improve compatibility with TCCD memory I tried with success these settings: Trtw auto or 3 at least Idle Cycle Limit 128 clks DDR DQ Drive Strength 50% reduction It improved the stability of my Gskill TCCD with a very little loss of performance but making them work GREAT at 1t...maybe it'll work for you too,guys Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now