robberbaron

It only displays two temps: System1 and System2 Both hover around 32C. The CPU thats in there is a RevE6 sempron 3100+. Thanks.

Well, the nF4 DFI boards aren't that great. I have the SLI-DR one and couldn't be happier. I work in a retail store, though. Of the 4 DFI Ultra-D's we sold, 3 were DOA. Not exactly cool IMO.

Yeah, I know all that. But I know two others that have the same issue, and one of them is using a Rev. E Newark chip and has the same problem. Why is it that other boards with the same chip can do it, but not the DFI? Yeah, it's a great overclocking board, but it seems odd to me that there's a middle dimm slot that doesn't seem to work all of the time.

I've talked to several people that have also used the board, and the middle dimm slot causes instability for every configuration its used it. It refuses to post on mine with just a stick in it, actually. But the MSI K8N Neo can use all 3 dimms equally fine. Why is this?

bump

This harddrive was working perfectly well in my UT nF3-250 board. However, Windows does not see and Windows Install can't install to it. I was able to get the Silicon Image chip to low level format it, but thats the only thing that can see the harddrive. I used both the 3/10 bios and 5/10-1 beta.

They would call it Venice then. Venice is the same as San Digeo, but with half the cache turned off. Every Venice "started out" as a San Diego.

The DDR booster is useless on the Lanparty. The bios already gives you the option of up to 4.0vdimm. It's not like the booster will take the 5v rail and use it for the vdimm.

A lot of clawhammers have bad memory controllers. For instance, I can go to memtest and get no errors at DDR510. But I can only get to windows with an HTT less than 230. I've taken down the HTT multi to 3 and it still doesnt help. 10x240HTT doesnt even work! Also, ill be in windows with clockgen, and if I push the htt up past 230, windows will die. And by die, I mean a system file or two will corrupt and I'll have to reinstall windows.

SSE3 does little for the A64 architecture since it was designed for the Netburst. It may provide a boost, but it's nothing to buy a new processor for. As for my "info," why would the CTO of AMD want to downplay his own product if he wasn't telling the truth? http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2387&p=4

They won't hit 2.8 if they are intentionally putting slow transistors in them. I'd like a PM about this too. I have to believe.

I'm interested in the Turion, but I have some reservations about it. "Much as we suspected, all of the power optimizations that went "into" Turion 64 are all transistor level optimizations. Basically selecting transistors that provide better thermal and power characteristics at the expense of lower switching frequencies. Given that the Turion 64 runs at multiple speed grades lower than the fastest desktop Athlon 64s, this tradeoff makes sense, but it also means that Turion 64 is no Pentium M killer" This was stated by AMD's CTO. Looks like the Turion could either be mediocre, or just plain crap for OC'ing. I just can't justify something with slow transistors over my 3700+.