CORECENTER KILLED MY PROCESSOR

Well what a c##p day i have had - if it wasnt the problems i had with bios 1.3V killing my mobo - this really has f##ked me off. X(
I have this setup -
Pentium P4 3.0C MSI Neo FIS2R
Winbond 3700 DDR
Adaptec 2110S SCSI Card
2 x Seagate Cheetah 36.4GB 15K RPM
Nice setup ???? NOT WITHOUT A PROCESSOR !
What can i say - this is how it happened - be carefull that your computer doesnt go the same way :O
1. Installed Bios Version 1.32 - Best for overclocking
2. Went into bios and configured the system including these clock speeds -
265FSB
1.7V Core
2.9V Mem
1.8V GPU
These setting are ALL safe settings
3. Installed Windows XP Professional
4. Installed all the divers from the MSI Disk
5. While installing my other software - ie sandra, cpu-z to benchmark. I run cpu-z - it shows that the core voltage is 1.75V - i though fine. Did some benching which it passed ok then Shut down the computer.
6. Later i Restarted computer
7. After reading about corecenter i decided to install the software in order to find out the processor temps etc and restarted the computer
8.Did some benching and it blue screened - strange i thought - maybe a speed problem
9. Entered bios - says between 1.68 and 1.72 volts - fine i think must be ok. Changed to 250FSB
10. restart windows - check voltage options in corecenter - says 1.7V (which it must have got from bios) the cpu speed is also correct
10. on the front screen of corecenter it says the core voltage is 2.1V yet the settings are 1.7V (my fist thoughts were "s##t!!!")
11. I tried to uninstall corecenter and the computer just blue screened, turned off and never restarted !!! - chip fried in all of 10 mins
WELL WHAT CAN I SAY - CORECENTER IS A POORLY WRITTEN PIECE OF SOFTWARE WHICH HAS TOO MANY BUGS AND HAS COST ME A LOT OF MONEY
REPLACING A £350 PROCESSOR IS NOT CHEAP - THATS OVER 2 WEEKS WAGES FOR ME - ADD TO THAT THE COST OF POSTAGE TO SEND BACK THE MOBO WHEN BIOS 1.3 MESSED IT UP.
CAN A MSI REP TO REPLY TO ME ON THIS MATTER - I STUCK BY MSI EVEN WHEN EVERYONE WALKED AFTER THE BIOS 1.3 MESS - NOW IM STUCK WITH A PROCESSOR WHICH HAS FRIED DUE TO YOUR SOFTWARE !!!!
I WILL TRY TO RMA - IF I CANT I WANT SOME SORT OF APOLOGY FROM MSI AND A NEW PROCESSOR
REGARDS
JASON

Now I will shed my light on MSI's CoreCenter from hell.
I've been using Linux since I put this new computer together at the end of March with absolutely no problems. A week or so ago I needed a Windows installed because I cannot go without gaming. Anyways so here it goes...
I installed Microsoft Windows XP Professional (32-bit) and everything went fine all the way through Windows Update and installing all the drivers, included:
VIA SATA Controller (done with disk during Windows Installation)
ATI Catalyst Drivers for the ATI card from ATI's website
Soundblaster Audigy 2 from CD-ROM then Web updated to current from website
VIA Hyperion Drivers (all included)
VIA USB 2.0 Drivers
any others you might have questions on were automatically installed by Windows
Then I installed MSI CoreCenter Plus... no problems there, opens up everything is read fine, settings look normal.
Now I go to install Counter-Strike Condition Zero. It starts copying over the files when suddenly the computer locks up and the once playing music in Winamp goes to just a beep. The screen didnt disappear, so I knew the graphics card didnt go out, so I waited a while to see if it was a graphics card lock-up (ATI has a VPU Recover program which resets the GPU in the event that it locks up.. and it does work.. continue reading to see how I know.)
I figured it was Windows and as usual Windows can lock-up like this once in a while (however you usually get blue screen's/STOP messages). So, after waiting a minute I turned off the computer, waited 20 seconds then turned it back on and started up Windows, it checked the D:\ drive as that is what was active when the computer frooze (I have C:\ for the Windows install and apps, D:\ for whatever else including games.) Then after it finished it continued on normally through the Windows startup process and I tried the installation once more, this time without Winamp running. As it was installing I opened up IE and went to a website, just after it loaded the same thing happened but this time no sound beep as Winamp wasnt running. Now I knew there was something wrong so I started experimenting. I enabled Spread Spectrum (I really dont know if EMI would even cause this but it had to do with fixing stability issues so I tried it), disabled ChipECC Kill, auto fan speed setting, and reset the configuration data (maybe it was some IRQ error?). Long story short same thing happened again, this time it was the GPU that frooze, the ATI graphics card successfully restarted it, but then the CPU's locked up JUST after it reset the graphics card.
So I restarted and tried again, this time it frooze the CPU's right off the bat.
Ok so BIOS settings seem to have nothing to do with this.
I played crazy and reinstalled Windows completely this time using ACPI Multiprocessor. Same things happened again, so I reinstalled Windows
Luckily for me I forgot to install CoreCenter this time and wow, everything installed fine, with Winamp running, hardcore CPU usage and GPU usage WHILE installing the games. Of course I didnt realize it was CoreCenter right away until I compared what could have been different before the previous installs, finally landing on CoreCenter not being installed after 5 minutes of thinking.
So I uninstalled Counter-Strike: Condition Zero again, installed MSI CoreCenter Plus and tried installing Condition Zero. Guess what? Lock-ups start occuring again.
I thought maybe it could be some Hard-Drive conflict with MSI CoreCenter somehow... So I uninstalled CoreCenter, then installed Condition Zero into the C:\ partition, then installed MSI CoreCenter and played the game. Within a few minutes the computer locked up. So I uninstalled Corecenter, then played the game with no problems for 2 hours until I was too tired to play anymore.
I see absolutely no conclusive results on what the problem could be with CoreCenter. However one thing is VERY conclusive and almost guaranteed... MSI CORECENTER IS NOT STABLE!!!!!
I should also note that I have all the BIOS's flashed to the latest. I looked for a motherboard BIOS upgrade but it appears there are no newer ones for the K8T Master-2 FAR minus a BETA one that only adds support for the K8 FX series cpu's anyways.
So right now everything is running fine without CoreCenter, however it appears you cant use Motherboard Monitor with this motherboard as it causes the computer to restart when it tries reading the data (I tried with cpu speed handling enabled and disabled in the BIOS.)

Similar Messages

Itunes 7.0.1.8 killed my processor !

Well not quite but the cpu usage is so high that it might as well have. 100% usage when ripping/importing a cd, synching.....which is now painfulllllllllly slow compared to ver 6 and even going from 1 track to another jumps the cpu upto 100%.
What on earth has apple done, didn't they grasp the simple concept that a newer version is meant to improve on an older version. The only thing that the the 0.1.8 release fixed for me was the quicktime/scratching audio fault.
I'm giving apple another 14days to fix this excuse for a software release or its "downgrading" to ver 6 for me.
Self built Athlon 64 3400+ Windows XP Pro 5th Gen 60gb Black
Self built Athlon 64 3400+ 2gb mem 300gb HD, Nividia 6800GT Windows XP Pro 5th Gen 60gb Black

One thing I have tried is turning off Cover Flow on all the different views (music, playlists etc.) It seems to speed things up a bit.
I have experienced the same problem as you (and I am sure countless others). My once speedy machine acts as if it were designed to play "pong" and nothing else!
I hope this is fixed next time around or I, too, will have to go back to 6.
Good luck,
VJ
iTunes 7.0.1 Windows XP Slowness with new iTunes

Spend on core processor or vid card?

Hope this is ok question for the lounge. Building a new system and wondering if it's better to spend on the core processor, say an Intel Corei7-960 vs i7-920, or pony up for a more expensive video card like a GeForce 275GTX? Maybe both are unnecessary for Production Premium? I create several DVDs and burn 20-30 copies of each for friends and family every year, but I'm not in the biz.
Maybe a better question would be to ask if someone on the site has a 'template' or guide for high level, cost effective system specs? One thing I will pay for is a component that speeds up rendering time!
Thanks for any help...

I would stay with the i7 920. Get an inexpensive video card. Until Adobe releases Mercury, the video card has a near insignificant impact on your editing experience. Be sure to use an X58 motherboard. It looks like Intel will be releasing a killer 32nm processor at the beginning of 2010 that will be compatible with the X58 boards. For the video card, I like the ATI 4830. It's cheap and works well. Now if you are going to be playing demanding games on this system, go with a higher end video card.
I would get a Raptor 150 for your system drive, and two other large capacity drives for your media. Although not 100% accurate, I go to newegg.com and check out the product reviews. For instance, I would avoid some of the Seagate 1.5TBs.
*They have several youtube videos on the Gigabyte motherboards we recently bought. There are 3 "unboxing" videos where the guys are getting their hands all over the static sensitive electronic components. The fact that many people simply aren't careful with the stuff they buy is one reason why, I only use the newegg.com customers reviews as a general guideline.

[radeon] Xorg 100% CPU, freezes, only way to resume is to reboot

Hello, I have an ATI Radeon 9250 with the bleeding edge Arch. Occasionally, my graphics will randomly stop working, and the only thing that works is the mouse (although slowly)
Rarely, the graphics cut out completely and the screen turns off, or I get an "Input Signal Out of Range" message from my monitor.
The kernel doesn't crash however, I can SSH in (very slowly) and then killall -9 Xorg (but it makes no difference on the screen).
If I run 'top' I see Xorg uses nearly 100% of CPU until it is killed by "KILL" signal. Even then, the process doesn't disappear, it just kills the processor usage.
I will see if I can get an Xorg log and 'dmesg' from one of these crashes.
/etc/X11/xorg.conf below:
Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "X.org Configured"
Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0
# Screen 1 "Screen1" RightOf "Screen0"
InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection
Section "Files"
ModulePath "/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1"
EndSection
Section "Module"
Load "extmod"
Load "glx"
Load "dri"
Load "record"
Load "dbe"
Load "dri2"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Keyboard0"
Driver "kbd"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Mouse0"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "auto"
Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
#DisplaySize 300 220 # mm
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "HWP"
ModelName "HP vs15"
HorizSync 30.0 - 63.0
VertRefresh 50.0 - 76.0
Option "DPMS"
EndSection
#Section "Monitor"
# Identifier "Monitor1"
# VendorName "Monitor Vendor"
# ModelName "Monitor Model"
#EndSection
Section "Device"
### Available Driver options are:-
### Values: : integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
### [arg]: arg optional
#Option "NoAccel" # [<bool>]
#Option "SWcursor" # [<bool>]
#Option "Dac6Bit" # [<bool>]
#Option "Dac8Bit" # [<bool>]
#Option "BusType" # [<str>]
#Option "CPPIOMode" # [<bool>]
#Option "CPusecTimeout" # 
#Option "AGPMode" # 
#Option "AGPFastWrite" # [<bool>]
#Option "AGPSize" # 
#Option "GARTSize" # 
#Option "RingSize" # 
#Option "BufferSize" # 
#Option "EnableDepthMoves" # [<bool>]
Option "EnablePageFlip"
#Option "NoBackBuffer" # [<bool>]
#Option "DMAForXv" # [<bool>]
#Option "FBTexPercent" # 
#Option "DepthBits" # 
#Option "PCIAPERSize" # 
#Option "AccelDFS" # [<bool>]
#Option "IgnoreEDID" # [<bool>]
#Option "DisplayPriority" # [<str>]
#Option "PanelSize" # [<str>]
#Option "ForceMinDotClock" # <freq>
#Option "ColorTiling" # [<bool>]
#Option "VideoKey" # 
#Option "RageTheatreCrystal" # 
#Option "RageTheatreTunerPort" # 
#Option "RageTheatreCompositePort" # 
#Option "RageTheatreSVideoPort" # 
#Option "TunerType" # 
#Option "RageTheatreMicrocPath" # <str>
#Option "RageTheatreMicrocType" # <str>
#Option "ScalerWidth" # 
Option "RenderAccel"
#Option "SubPixelOrder" # [<str>]
#Option "ShowCache" # [<bool>]
#Option "DynamicClocks" # [<bool>]
#Option "VGAAccess" # [<bool>]
#Option "ReverseDDC" # [<bool>]
#Option "LVDSProbePLL" # [<bool>]
Option "AccelMethod" "EXA"
#Option "DRI" # [<bool>]
#Option "ConnectorTable" # <str>
#Option "DefaultConnectorTable" # [<bool>]
#Option "DefaultTMDSPLL" # [<bool>]
#Option "TVDACLoadDetect" # [<bool>]
#Option "ForceTVOut" # [<bool>]
#Option "TVStandard" # <str>
#Option "IgnoreLidStatus" # [<bool>]
#Option "DefaultTVDACAdj" # [<bool>]
#Option "Int10" # [<bool>]
#Option "EXAVSync" # [<bool>]
#Option "ATOMTVOut" # [<bool>]
#Option "R4xxATOM" # [<bool>]
Identifier "Card0"
Driver "radeon"
VendorName "ATI Technologies Inc"
BoardName "RV280 [Radeon 9200 PRO]"
BusID "PCI:0:8:0"
EndSection
#Section "Device"
# ### Available Driver options are:-
# ### Values: : integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
# ### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
# ### [arg]: arg optional
# #Option "ShadowFB" # [<bool>]
# #Option "DefaultRefresh" # [<bool>]
# #Option "ModeSetClearScreen" # [<bool>]
# Identifier "Card1"
# Driver "vesa"
# VendorName "Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS]"
# BoardName "661/741/760 PCI/AGP or 662/761Gx PCIE VGA Display Adapter"
# BusID "PCI:1:0:0"
#EndSection
Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Card0"
Monitor "Monitor0"
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 1
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 4
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 8
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 15
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 16
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
EndSubSection
EndSection
#Section "Screen"
# Identifier "Screen1"
# Device "Card1"
# Monitor "Monitor1"
# SubSection "Display"
# Viewport 0 0
# Depth 1
# EndSubSection
# SubSection "Display"
# Viewport 0 0
# Depth 4
# EndSubSection
# SubSection "Display"
# Viewport 0 0
# Depth 8
# EndSubSection
# SubSection "Display"
# Viewport 0 0
# Depth 15
# EndSubSection
# SubSection "Display"
# Viewport 0 0
# Depth 16
# EndSubSection
# SubSection "Display"
# Viewport 0 0
# Depth 24
# EndSubSection
#EndSection
I really hope someone can get to the bottom of this, it has been annoying me for quite some time. In fact, I think since the release of Xorg 7.0 if I remember.
Its gotten worse, which is why I'm posting.

I just set up the radeon driver for my HD 4200 graphics. I just installed Arch a couple of days ago so I am hopelessly noob.
Anyway, after a ton of messing around I got one screen working with KMS off, a minimal xorg.conf and then changed to 2 screens with xrandr. I don't have 3d working yet, which is not a big deal for my uses. But I figure I get something working and then start adding features. Oh yeah, I'm using Xorg 1.7.1
my xorg:
Section "Device"
Identifier "HD4200"
Driver "radeon"
BusID "PCI:1:5:0"
# Option "VGA-0" "Samsung"
# Option "DVI-0" "Dell"
EndSection
Section "Screen"
Identifier "HD4200"
Device "HD4200"
DefaultDepth 24
Subsection "Display"
Virtual 3200 1200
EndSubsection
EndSection
Section "DRI"
Group "video"
Mode 0666
EndSection
The command that puts the screens where I want them:
xrandr --output VGA-0 --auto --right-of DVI-0

JScrollPane is smearing JPanel

When painting to a panel inside a JScrollPane, I am having problems with the panel smearing as I scroll. It looks just as though it's repainting over what was already painted on the panel. Just as some testing, I called repaint within my paint method just to try and determine where the issue was coming from. While this didn't fix the issue nor kill my processor, it did seem to make it a little better. Could this be a problem as to the way I am drawing to the panel, or an issue with my use of the JScrollPane?
Here is my SongDisplay class that extends a JPanel:
package gui;
import java.awt.Color;
import java.awt.Dimension;
import java.awt.Graphics;
import java.awt.event.MouseEvent;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.List;
import javax.swing.JPanel;
* @author tlee
public class SongDisplay extends JPanel implements /*MouseListener,*/ SongDisplayInterface
 List<SongFileWordDisplay> words = Collections.synchronizedList(new ArrayList<SongFileWordDisplay>());
 public SongDisplay()
 super();
 /*this.setPreferredSize(new Dimension(width, GuiConstants.SONG_DISPLAY_HEIGHT));
 this.addMouseListener(this);*/
 @Override
 public void paint(Graphics g)
 g.setColor(Color.BLACK);
 synchronized (words)
 for (SongFileWordDisplay word : words)
 g.drawString(word.getLyric(), word.getPoint().x, word.getPoint().y);
 public void setWidth(int width)
 this.setPreferredSize(new Dimension(width, GuiConstants.SONG_DISPLAY_HEIGHT));
 super.revalidate();
 public synchronized void addSongFileWordDisplay(SongFileWordDisplay sfwd)
 words.add(sfwd);
 this.repaint();
}

tristanlee85 wrote:
When painting to a panel inside a JScrollPane, I am having problems with the panel smearing as I scroll. It looks just as though it's repainting over what was already painted on the panel. Just as some testing, I called repaint within my paint method just to try and determine where the issue was coming from. While this didn't fix the issue nor kill my processor, it did seem to make it a little better. Could this be a problem as to the way I am drawing to the panel, or an issue with my use of the JScrollPane?
Here is my SongDisplay class that extends a JPanel:
package gui;
import java.awt.Color;
import java.awt.Dimension;
import java.awt.Graphics;
import java.awt.event.MouseEvent;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.List;
import javax.swing.JPanel;
* @author tlee
public class SongDisplay extends JPanel implements /*MouseListener,*/ SongDisplayInterface
List<SongFileWordDisplay> words = Collections.synchronizedList(new ArrayList<SongFileWordDisplay>());
public SongDisplay()
super();
/*this.setPreferredSize(new Dimension(width, GuiConstants.SONG_DISPLAY_HEIGHT));
this.addMouseListener(this);*/
@Override
public void paint(Graphics g)
g.setColor(Color.BLACK);
synchronized (words)
for (SongFileWordDisplay word : words)
g.drawString(word.getLyric(), word.getPoint().x, word.getPoint().y);
public void setWidth(int width)
this.setPreferredSize(new Dimension(width, GuiConstants.SONG_DISPLAY_HEIGHT));
super.revalidate();
public synchronized void addSongFileWordDisplay(SongFileWordDisplay sfwd)
words.add(sfwd);
this.repaint();
It is definetly a problem in your paint--you need to call super.paint(g) as the first thing so your object will be painted correctly before you try to put your twist of the world in there.

Do NOT use text.autoSize onEnterFrame or any other loops!!

do NOT use test.autoSize = true - with onEnterFrame or any
other loops!! - it kills the processor i just found out the other
day why my movieclip scrollers and dynamic menus have been laggin
so much sins the dawn of time -- its all because of text.autoSize =
true -
i turn it off as soon as i has the final text length and
everything runs smooth

Hi Swetha,
Maintain traslations for your text in Tcode: se63
Regards,
kalandar

Xy graph point tip strip

I am using LV6.1 with Win2000. I would like to have the mouse pointer show the value of a point on an xy graph like Excel does. Is there a way to do this?

Well not exactly like Excel but Excel cheats and limits you to 65535 samples in a plot!
The built in functionality you should investigate is the cursor legend. That is available from
show>>>Cursor Legend
You can resize the cursor legend as you see fit.
The cursors can be set to snap to a point on a plot and the cursor legend will show the X and Y values of where the cursor is positioned.
You can drag the cursor or use the "arrows" to move teh cursor one step at a time.
I have written custom code that will do the "mouse over thing" but that is over-kill in most cases (mouse overs can kill most processors!).
I hope this help,
Ben
Ben Rayner
Certified LabVIEW Developer
www.DSAutomation.com
Ben Rayner
I am currently active on.. MainStream Preppers
Rayner's Ridge is under construction

[HELP] All versions of Flash running slow!

I'm using Vista 64 on a more then adequate laptop, I initially used Flash CS4 and it was great for the past week but a few days ago it started geting really slow, whenever I copy, change frame, select something, basicaly any change action I have to wait about 5 seconds or more for a reaction. I'm using it for simple animation, no symbols, just 3 layers. I have a deadline coming up for my final production and if I can't fix this fast I'm screwed. I've tried every solution I can find, including trying Flash CS3 and Flash 8, nothing seems to fix the slow speed. PLEASE any help would be super appreciated.

The dimensions of the FLA file won't make a difference, it just matters what kind of content in it (it may make a difference if the bigger size means you tend to put more things in it, that's all )
By resources I'm just meaning what's going on in the Task Manager (alt-ctrl-del and choose Task Manager or right-click the lower right corner of your screen and choose Task Manager). Flash may be using a lot of memory because there are a lot of vectors in the document. You can watch it go up and down when you make selections and so on. The rest of your computer may be fine, but each time you select something in Flash, Flash has to process all of the vectors/information in your selection then figure out how to manipulate (and so on). For instance, you can import a bitmap with the dimensions of your document and "trace bitmap" - in some cases you can kill the processor creating that many vectors (it's simply a ton of data to process).
Are there particular instances that are slower than others in this document? You have tried this in earlier versions and it's equally slow in those as well?
You may want to save an alternate version of this FLA and try optimizing the graphics and see if you find there's a big improvement with that.

Overclocking tips please

have a 3500+, 1 gig of pqi turbo 3200(2,2,2,5), raid 0 raptor hard drives,430 watt true power supply, ati 9800 xt, bios version 1.3.........i cant get the system to overclock much, it seems to only be stable at 225 fsb with ht x4 and multiplier at x11,agp is set at 67, i have the timing settings for the ram at 2.5,3,3,5,2t with 2.65v and cpu 225fsb with 1.55v with cooler master heat sink. i have the aggressive time settings for the memory in the bios on enable.........i keep on getting freezes and i have to manually turn off the computer when i try to go over 225, i've tried more vcore voltage, more relaxed timings for the ram, more voltage for the ram, aggressive timings on disable, ht x3, nothing will let me overclock more and be stable. i know this setup is capable of running faster but i think i have it configured wrong................please help!!!!!!!!

JER101 gives sound advice. I think just by the sound of things that the limiting factor in your overclock is your memory. If you want to know how to determine your limiting factor in your overclock, read this:
Disclaimer:
I do not know everything. I do not consider myself knowledgable. I believe the knowledgable ones are those that design the hardware and us enduser's are mere peons. This guide is a combination of personal knowledge coupled mainly with knowledge from those smarter than myself. My intent here is not to plagerize. I intend to relay knowledge in the fashion which I obtained it -- free of cost. If I'm plagerizing, I apoligze, my intentions were not to cheat someone out of their findings. If you find anything in this sticky that looks like one of your findings then please notify me and I will be happy to give you credit where credit's due.
Now that we've covered all the bases, what should you keep in mind:
CPU manufacturers do not make different processors -- they make one and test it at the highest speed possible. This may be the case with each different core/design but I'm can't say for sure (I don't know all the details, I do not work for a CPU manufacturer, I only know what I'm told). What I do know, however, is that they test the chip at the maximum supported frequency (for a barton processor that would be 2.33ghz (166x14).). If that frequency yields an unacceptable rate of failure then they the slow the processor down to the next fastest frequency (in the case of a barton that would be 2.2ghz (200x12).). After slowing the processor down, they run the tests again and if it passes with an acceptable rate of failure then they stamp it at that speed. However, if it fails, they slow the processor down again to it's next slowest frequency (2.15ghz (166x13).). and then they repeat the process until they achieve an acceptable rate of failure/success. Therefore, if you think about it, your processor wasn’t designed to run any faster than it was rated for, otherwise it would have been stamped at a higher clock frequency (unless of course your processor has the highest possible stamping for that line of products). Why should you keep this in mind? If you hit a wall when overclocking and your CPU is the culprit, it may just be the case that the CPU cannot stabilize itself at a higher frequency (meaning your current highest stable frequency is the max stable frequency).
As you have noticed, VCore and cooling play a crucial role in acheiving the highest stable overclock. You always want the least amount of VCore running through the chip becuase this limits electromigration (which decreases chip life) and it will keep the processor cooler (which increases chip life). When overclocking, it may seem easiest to raise the VCore to some arbitrarily high number that you know will work regardless of which settings you pick but I wouldn’t recommend doing it like that. I recommend starting out at the stock VCore and bumping it up one step at a time, incramenting the VCore from the first lowest VCore, to the second lowest VCore, to the third lowest VCore, etc, etc, etc, until you can stabilize your computer with whatever VCore you've reached. Cooling plays a crucial role because sometimes you cannot use a designated VCore with an insufficent means of cooling. If you can't run prime95 without errors at one VCore but you can at another (but the problem is the computer shuts off after a couple of seconds into the run) then chances are the temperatures rose too high and the thermal throttling diode kicked in and shut down the computer. An aftermarket means of cooling whether it be a good HSF or a good watercooling kit will help you keep your load temps down, jumps in temperature will be less severe and less frequent, and idle temps will drop as well. Therefore when overclocking, you should consider a motherboard that has a wide range of VCore options available and a means of cooling that can take that much VCore (for those of you who are wondering it's possible to calculate whether or not your selected means of cooling will be sufficent enough to dissapate the estimated amount of power your processor requires).
What else do you need to know:
When it comes to overclocking there are a lot of factors to consider. First and foremost is no two computer components are alike; just because one person with the same components as you got to a certain point does not mean you will get there. Next, when overclocking, more often than not you need to raise the Vcore when you raise your CPU frequency higher than stock. This was not the case for my winchester as I could hit 2500mhz (stock being 2000mhz) and I could do this without a bump in VCore (and it was superpi, 3dmark, pcmark, prime95 stable). Lets just say I couldn't hit 2500mhz, me personally, I would be happy with 2200mhz because I didn't have to raise my VCore (which in turn theoretically decreases chip life -- this is also coming from a guy who’s running his computer at 2750mhz with an unspoken VCore so I’ll let you weigh that last statement yourself).
What process do I follow when overclocking:
When overclocking there is a process you must follow, this process will help you determine the limiting factor in your overclock. Note that I do not condone raising voltages higher than stock but you can do it at your own discression but we are all xtreme here and so there's no doubt in my mind that most of you will take this with a grain of salt. One thing to consider when buying parts is which memory module/s you're going to use. When I bought my computer, I had overclocking in mind and I bought PC4400 memory. Why would you want to buy memory that supports a higher FSB? PC4400 stands for the bandwidth of the memory (therefore PC4400 memory transmits data at 4.4GB/s as opposed to PC3200 which transmits data at 3.2GB/s -- you can see why someone would want higher frequency memory). FYI: If you're worried you may not be able to run your memory at it's rated speed if it's not PC3200, you can always keep it's rated timings (which are usually slower than PC3200) and lower the frequency to 200mhz (memory always runs at lower frequencies). If you've already purchased your components and you did not consider higher memory bandwidth at the time then you're forced to use your PC3200, PC2700, or PC2100 memory (most computers now a days require PC3200 memory) then you're going to use dividers. Dividers can also be used when your processor can go further but your memory can't (ie. you have a 3200+ A64 (locked max multiplier of 10) and you want to acheive more than 2500mhz with your 250mhz ram, you would put your memory on a divider and you would raise the FSB higher than 250 keeping your 10 mulitplier. This would keep your ram within specifications (it may not run at 250 but it will run higher than 200 (which is better than nothing) and your processor would go higher than 2500mhz).
Now that you've picked the right memory, what do you do:
First you raise your FSB to match your memory's stock FSB (pc3200 @ 200mhz FSB or pc4000 @ 250mhz FSB). Simultaneously, you lower your mutliplier so that your CPU frequency is now lower than stock (stock is 2000mhz so your new frequency is ~1600mhz (200x8 or 250x6). This omits your processor from the equation's list of potential problems because the CPU was designed to run at a higher frequency with your current (stock) VCore. Now that you've successfully set your FSB and lowered your multiplier so that your current CPU frequency <= stock CPU frequency, you would run memtest86+ for two entire days to ensure your memory is no longer going to be considered a limiting factor in your overclock. Memtest will help ensure that your memory is not the reason for your overclocking problems.
Quote
originally written by eva2000
memtest ain't 100% but you can use memtest to guage the max possible FSB/MEM which is the top limit of what you can expect... since i don't think i've ever experienced windows 100% stability and error free at a speed higher than the highest memtest passable speed
therefore
max FSB/MEM speed (100% windows error free/stability) <= max FSB/MEM speed (memtest error free)
My experiences and testing methods
test #1 - 4
are cpu fsb speed and or vcore related (meaning lowering fsb or increasing vcore saw errors in these tests disappear)
test #5
prior to 865/875 boards - memory speed, timings and vdimm related (meaning altering mem speed, timings and/or vdimm saw errors in this test disappear)
test#6
with 865/875 boards bigtoe has said related to cycle time (tras) in cpuz which i sort of confirmed with my current testing
note: prior to 865/875 boards, i've never had memory errors in test #6 only since these new boards have i experienced test #6 errors
test #7
not sure very rarely have i experienced errors
extended test
test #8 is a more intensive version of test #5
most memory related errors pop up at test #5 hence i like looping test #5 for memory testing for 12-24hrs after 1-4hr general standard loop of test #1-7
i like to loop test #3 and/or #4 for cpu related issues
I follow it up with at least goldmem 5.07:
2 quick test loops
+
2-4 full standard loops <-- can take forever trying doing it with 4 x 512mb xms3200c2
to loop a particular test
Note: if you decide to overclock your memory (pc3200 @ 225 FSB) then you will probably need to raise your VDimm and/or retard your memory timings (the ram you buy will determine which of the two you will end up doing). Ultimately you will be the judge as to what's acceptable and what's not. You can and should always record your results and test each of them with benchmarking ultilities so you know that your getting the most performance (in other words, a small gain in FSB with very laxidazical memory timings may yield worse benchmarks than a slightly slower FSB with tight timings). Now that you know this, raise your FSB in incraments of 5 mhz. test as specified and raise again. when you get an error you can back down 5 mhz and live with that, and/or raise VDimm and try again, and/or retard the timings and try again. When error time comes, you will be the judge of this.
Note: I got my DDR333 memory (166mhz) to run successfully at DDR374 (187mhz) with a change in timings of 2-2-2-5 to 2-2-2-11. The processor would not boot with a 200mhz FSB (in order to do so I would have to close a bridge and I was not willing to mod the customer's processor) but had I modded the processor I honestly believe I could have gotten the DDR333 memory to run at DDR400 speed with the right timings.[/SIZE]
Now what:
Now that you've reached a stable FSB that your memory can handle, begin to raise your multiplier. Try and pick a frequency that's <= stock frequency this way you don't need to experiment with Vcore just yet. Once this runs prime95 at priority 10 with inplace FFTs for days with no errors you can raise your multiplier. Raise it one notch at a time, recording your results with benchmarking tools to ensure your getting the most performance with each change that you make. If you run into errors, raise the Vcore and try again. Make sure to monitor the temperatures when using prime95, you don't want to kill your processor with too much heat. You will either find a sucessful outcome or you won't. Successful outcomes are higher CPU frequency that's prime95 stable with or without a bump in VCore. Unsuccessful outcomes are prime95 instability with or without a bump in VCore or prime95 stability with/without a bump in VCore but temperature problems forced you to end the test prematurely.
If you follow these steps you will know why your computer won't overclock anymore -- whether it be ram (timings), ram (FSB), ram (voltage), temperatures, cpu (multiplier), cpu (voltage), etc, etc, etc...
Note: if you want to test just your processor in prime95 and take the memory out of the equation (or take as much of the memory out of the equation as possible) then you would run a prime95 tortue test called "Small FTT's".
When I get the time, I will add certain components I have experience with into this sticky and my suggestions as to what parts you should purchase with them and what parts you should stay away from.[/FONT]

Unlocked iPhone + AppleCare

Hey, anyone know what happens if my phone breaks if I did the software unlock on the iphone? Did I void applecare by doing the software unlock? Thanks guys...

Allan is correct with his quote. That is offical Apple policy.
However, Apple is about customer service.
What I suggest (and Apple has the final say if/when it comes down to service) is that if you have an issue with the phone, wipe it clean and restore it to factory software. If the problem persists, send it in for repair. Apple will let you know if they feel it is not covered by warranty.
Certain types of hardware damage can be caused by software not intended for the device (overclocking can kill the processor and memory components, volme boosting can destroy the receiver and speaker.)
Certain types of hardware failure would not be related to such software (i.e. if you steal music or ringtones, it wouldn't cause a hardware issue, just jail time.) Apple will be able to determine the nature of the failure and in doing so will let you know if it is or is not covered.
On an ethcial note, if you do something such as overclocking and you cook the thing, please don't try to send it in for a "freebie."
I would suggest NOT using any volume hacks, overclocks, brightness hacks, etc. They will know, and deny repair.

[Athlon64] Over Clocking?

whats the max you can overclock theres mobos i get 220 x 10 afterthat it freezes and gets choppy is there somethin i can do to make it faster? overcloc,upgrade just tell me i gots a tiger direct account so i can do more upgrading

Disclaimer:
I do not know everything. I do not consider myself knowledgable. I believe the knowledgable ones are those that design the hardware and us enduser's are mere peons. This guide is a combination of personal knowledge coupled mainly with knowledge from those smarter than myself. My intent here is not to plagerize. I intend to relay knowledge in the fashion which I obtained it -- free of cost. If I'm plagerizing, I apoligze, my intentions were not to cheat someone out of their findings. If you find anything in this sticky that looks like one of your findings then please notify me and I will be happy to give you credit where credit's due.
Now that we've covered all the bases, what should you keep in mind:
CPU manufacturers do not make different processors -- they make one and test it at the highest speed possible. This may be the case with each different core/design but I'm can't say for sure (I don't know all the details, I do not work for a CPU manufacturer, I only know what I'm told). What I do know, however, is that they test the chip at the maximum supported frequency (for a barton processor that would be 2.33ghz (166x14).). If that frequency yields an unacceptable rate of failure then they the slow the processor down to the next fastest frequency (in the case of a barton that would be 2.2ghz (200x12).). After slowing the processor down, they run the tests again and if it passes with an acceptable rate of failure then they stamp it at that speed. However, if it fails, they slow the processor down again to it's next slowest frequency (2.15ghz (166x13).). and then they repeat the process until they achieve an acceptable rate of failure/success. Therefore, if you think about it, your processor wasn’t designed to run any faster than it was rated for, otherwise it would have been stamped at a higher clock frequency (unless of course your processor has the highest possible stamping for that line of products). Why should you keep this in mind? If you hit a wall when overclocking and your CPU is the culprit, it may just be the case that the CPU cannot stabilize itself at a higher frequency (meaning your current highest stable frequency is the max stable frequency).
As you have noticed, VCore and cooling play a crucial role in acheiving the highest stable overclock. You always want the least amount of VCore running through the chip becuase this limits electromigration (which decreases chip life) and it will keep the processor cooler (which increases chip life). When overclocking, it may seem easiest to raise the VCore to some arbitrarily high number that you know will work regardless of which settings you pick but I wouldn’t recommend doing it like that. I recommend starting out at the stock VCore and bumping it up one step at a time, incramenting the VCore from the first lowest VCore, to the second lowest VCore, to the third lowest VCore, etc, etc, etc, until you can stabilize your computer with whatever VCore you've reached. Cooling plays a crucial role because sometimes you cannot use a designated VCore with an insufficent means of cooling. If you can't run prime95 without errors at one VCore but you can at another (but the problem is the computer shuts off after a couple of seconds into the run) then chances are the temperatures rose too high and the thermal throttling diode kicked in and shut down the computer. An aftermarket means of cooling whether it be a good HSF or a good watercooling kit will help you keep your load temps down, jumps in temperature will be less severe and less frequent, and idle temps will drop as well. Therefore when overclocking, you should consider a motherboard that has a wide range of VCore options available and a means of cooling that can take that much VCore (for those of you who are wondering it's possible to calculate whether or not your selected means of cooling will be sufficent enough to dissapate the estimated amount of power your processor requires).
What else do you need to know:
When it comes to overclocking there are a lot of factors to consider. First and foremost is no two computer components are alike; just because one person with the same components as you got to a certain point does not mean you will get there. Next, when overclocking, more often than not you need to raise the Vcore when you raise your CPU frequency higher than stock. This was not the case for my winchester as I could hit 2500mhz (stock being 2000mhz) and I could do this without a bump in VCore (and it was superpi, 3dmark, pcmark, prime95 stable). Lets just say I couldn't hit 2500mhz, me personally, I would be happy with 2200mhz because I didn't have to raise my VCore (which in turn theoretically decreases chip life -- this is also coming from a guy who’s running his computer at 2750mhz with an unspoken VCore so I’ll let you weigh that last statement yourself).
What process do I follow when overclocking:
When overclocking there is a process you must follow, this process will help you determine the limiting factor in your overclock. Note that I do not condone raising voltages higher than stock but you can do it at your own discression but we are all xtreme here and so there's no doubt in my mind that most of you will take this with a grain of salt. One thing to consider when buying parts is which memory module/s you're going to use. When I bought my computer, I had overclocking in mind and I bought PC4400 memory. Why would you want to buy memory that supports a higher FSB? PC4400 stands for the bandwidth of the memory (therefore PC4400 memory transmits data at 4.4GB/s as opposed to PC3200 which transmits data at 3.2GB/s -- you can see why someone would want higher frequency memory). FYI: If you're worried you may not be able to run your memory at it's rated speed if it's not PC3200, you can always keep it's rated timings (which are usually slower than PC3200) and lower the frequency to 200mhz (memory always runs at lower frequencies). If you've already purchased your components and you did not consider higher memory bandwidth at the time then you're forced to use your PC3200, PC2700, or PC2100 memory (most computers now a days require PC3200 memory) then you're going to use dividers. Dividers can also be used when your processor can go further but your memory can't (ie. you have a 3200+ A64 (locked max multiplier of 10) and you want to acheive more than 2500mhz with your 250mhz ram, you would put your memory on a divider and you would raise the FSB higher than 250 keeping your 10 mulitplier. This would keep your ram within specifications (it may not run at 250 but it will run higher than 200 (which is better than nothing) and your processor would go higher than 2500mhz).
Now that you've picked the right memory, what do you do:
First you raise your FSB to match your memory's stock FSB (pc3200 @ 200mhz FSB or pc4000 @ 250mhz FSB). Simultaneously, you lower your mutliplier so that your CPU frequency is now lower than stock (stock is 2000mhz so your new frequency is ~1600mhz (200x8 or 250x6). This omits your processor from the equation's list of potential problems because the CPU was designed to run at a higher frequency with your current (stock) VCore. Now that you've successfully set your FSB and lowered your multiplier so that your current CPU frequency <= stock CPU frequency, you would run memtest86+ for two entire days to ensure your memory is no longer going to be considered a limiting factor in your overclock. Memtest will help ensure that your memory is not the reason for your overclocking problems.
Quote
originally written by eva2000
memtest ain't 100% but you can use memtest to guage the max possible FSB/MEM which is the top limit of what you can expect... since i don't think i've ever experienced windows 100% stability and error free at a speed higher than the highest memtest passable speed
therefore
max FSB/MEM speed (100% windows error free/stability) <= max FSB/MEM speed (memtest error free)
My experiences and testing methods
test #1 - 4
are cpu fsb speed and or vcore related (meaning lowering fsb or increasing vcore saw errors in these tests disappear)
test #5
prior to 865/875 boards - memory speed, timings and vdimm related (meaning altering mem speed, timings and/or vdimm saw errors in this test disappear)
test#6
with 865/875 boards bigtoe has said related to cycle time (tras) in cpuz which i sort of confirmed with my current testing
note: prior to 865/875 boards, i've never had memory errors in test #6 only since these new boards have i experienced test #6 errors
test #7
not sure very rarely have i experienced errors
extended test
test #8 is a more intensive version of test #5
most memory related errors pop up at test #5 hence i like looping test #5 for memory testing for 12-24hrs after 1-4hr general standard loop of test #1-7
i like to loop test #3 and/or #4 for cpu related issues
I follow it up with at least goldmem 5.07:
2 quick test loops
+
2-4 full standard loops <-- can take forever trying doing it with 4 x 512mb xms3200c2
to loop a particular test
Note: if you decide to overclock your memory (pc3200 @ 225 FSB) then you will probably need to raise your VDimm and/or retard your memory timings (the ram you buy will determine which of the two you will end up doing). Ultimately you will be the judge as to what's acceptable and what's not. You can and should always record your results and test each of them with benchmarking ultilities so you know that your getting the most performance (in other words, a small gain in FSB with very laxidazical memory timings may yield worse benchmarks than a slightly slower FSB with tight timings). Now that you know this, raise your FSB in incraments of 5 mhz. test as specified and raise again. when you get an error you can back down 5 mhz and live with that, and/or raise VDimm and try again, and/or retard the timings and try again. When error time comes, you will be the judge of this.
Note: I got my DDR333 memory (166mhz) to run successfully at DDR374 (187mhz) with a change in timings of 2-2-2-5 to 2-2-2-11. The processor would not boot with a 200mhz FSB (in order to do so I would have to close a bridge and I was not willing to mod the customer's processor) but had I modded the processor I honestly believe I could have gotten the DDR333 memory to run at DDR400 speed with the right timings.[/SIZE]
Now what:
Now that you've reached a stable FSB that your memory can handle, begin to raise your multiplier. Try and pick a frequency that's <= stock frequency this way you don't need to experiment with Vcore just yet. Once this runs prime95 at priority 10 with inplace FFTs for days with no errors you can raise your multiplier. Raise it one notch at a time, recording your results with benchmarking tools to ensure your getting the most performance with each change that you make. If you run into errors, raise the Vcore and try again. Make sure to monitor the temperatures when using prime95, you don't want to kill your processor with too much heat. You will either find a sucessful outcome or you won't. Successful outcomes are higher CPU frequency that's prime95 stable with or without a bump in VCore. Unsuccessful outcomes are prime95 instability with or without a bump in VCore or prime95 stability with/without a bump in VCore but temperature problems forced you to end the test prematurely.
If you follow these steps you will know why your computer won't overclock anymore -- whether it be ram (timings), ram (FSB), ram (voltage), temperatures, cpu (multiplier), cpu (voltage), etc, etc, etc...
Note: if you want to test just your processor in prime95 and take the memory out of the equation (or take as much of the memory out of the equation as possible) then you would run a prime95 tortue test called "Small FTT's".
When I get the time, I will add certain components I have experience with into this sticky and my suggestions as to what parts you should purchase with them and what parts you should stay away from.[/FONT]

Delta-L Power Up Problems

Hello All,
I have just put together a new system using the Delta-L Nforce2 mobo. I got it all put together and I will power for about 3 seconds then it powers down. It will not even try and power back up unless I completely unplug the system. Then after that does the same thing.
Here is have I have :
Athlon XP 2700
Delta-L Nforce2 Motherboard
2 x Samsung Chipset 512MB DDR PC3200 400Mhz FSB Unbuffered CL3
ATI 9600 Pro 128meg
I have tried some diffrent things already aswell.... I have tried two diffrent cases each with diffrent PSU One Antec 350W and one Eremex
I have read that reseting the CMOS may help and that these boards are pickie about the memory used. However, i have read other posts similar to this and was wondering if anyone have been able to resolve this problem and what they did to do so.
Thanks

I had this exact same problem but found out it was my processor that was getting crushed by my fan and killing 2 processors before I found it. I got a new fan and RMA'd the processor and I have been up and running great for about 3 weeks. This power on and die within about 3 to 5 seconds seems to be a processor issue, becuase my Mobo and Ram I RMA'd the first time tested fine as well. I don't know if this helps or means absolutely nothing. ?(

CS4 Image Processor: Why does "Resize to Fit" kill my action?

I had some JPEG's that had some dark shadows. I already had a custom action in CS4 that was worked for what I needed that I could use with the image processor. What I did was just open, do my action and save as a JPEG.
The existing action simply was:
Convert to Smart Object
Shadow/Highlight
Smart Sharpen
Create Vibrance Layer
It worked fine until I added the "Resize to Fit" option in the Image Processor dialog.
While I could see the actions being stepped through, the final photo was just a resized version of the original without actions applied.
Why?
I used to do this in CS2...I thought.
Any help would be appreciated.
John J J

Thanks for your response.
I had already ended up using the "Fit Image" command which works...but the point is that I wanted run the script on several sets of images for different purposes which required specific sizes. It's convenient to do that in the "Image Processor" dialog when I run each set. I don't want to have to edit the action each time I do a different group of photos.
It's more a question of why this does not work than finding an alternate ways to accomplish the task.
i.e. Is it a bug or a misunderstanding on my part?
Thanks again,
JJJ

Ubd activity - what is it, and why is it using 87% of my processors, and killing my battery?

I have only seen two threads that have the term ubd and battery. I've shut off my bluetooth, my wifi, and all of my apps, and ubd still fluctuates between 7% and 87% with no explanation. I have a new MPB (non-retina), and my battery lasts perhaps 1 hour doing emails and internet. I can't go unplugged at all and expect to do photoshop or any other processor-intensive app. I'm on 10.8.3, and I've got 16GB of RAM, and a 1TB 7200RPM internal hard drive. My wife's 13" mbp is 3 years old, and she is on 10.7, and she gets 4 hours of usage in lightroom and photoshop, so what the heck is going on?
Also, I don't use antivirus or other firewall apps, in case you're wondering. I like to keep background stuff to a minimum.
It would be great if the mac support folks could chime in, and thanks in advance for anyone who might be able to help.
Thanks!

Best to post in the macbook pro forum
Direct you to the proper forum for MacBook :
MacBook Series Forumshttps://discussions.apple.com/community/notebooks?view=discussions
Mac OS X Forums
https://discussions.apple.com/community/mac_os?view=discussions
http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro
We are not notebook users.
What does Activity Monitor show for process that are the most active running?
There is an Apple article or user tip on what can cause battery drain, like those on the RIGHT "More like this"

Processor and graphics card upgrade for hp dc5100 MT(EF633US)

Can someone kindly tell me a variety of Intel processors and graphic cards which i can install in my pc coz right now i'm using Intel pentium 4 CPU 2.80 GHz and Intel 82915G/GV/910GL express chipset. but i would like to upgrade to a faster processor and a graphics card which can play games which require large graphic memory (eg FIFA 2013,GTA 5.etc)

Hi:
Personally, I wouldn't invest the money to upgrade that PC.
You would be better off getting an off lease newer dc5800 MT or dc7800/dc7900 model that has a PCIe x16 video slot.
The killer for your model is you can only install a PCI graphics card.
Very inefficient and pretty expensive for what you get in return.
After you install the required microcode update, the best processor I know for sure you can install would be the P4 650.
Below is the link to the quickspecs. The supported processors are listed on page 7.
I do not know of anyone who that has installed the 651 or 661 processors and got them to work--even though the specs state they are supported.
You can try the 651 or 661 and if you do, please let me know if they worked for you.
http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/12145_ca/12145_ca.pdf

CORECENTER KILLED MY PROCESSOR

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for