Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 60

Thread: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?




  1. #41
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    Now a run of 4.2GHz:

    Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?-linx-4670k-4-2ghz-1-jpg

    So results are almost identical in GFLOPs to the i7-4790K at 4.2GHz with Hyper Threading on. The similarities end there...

    First the core and CPU temps. I'm using a Thermalright True Spirit Power 140, with the Thermalright TY-143 fan. A great CPU cooler in general, but Haswell processors challenge the best. The 99C core temp is so close to thermal throttling, but none apparently occurred. The CPU fan was maxed out at 2500 RPM. I have the board in my CM HAF X case, a more open air type case.

    The main thing to notice is my VCore, max of 1.352V! That is Adaptive voltage doing its thing, which can be fixed... somewhat. Is LinX running AVX2 instructions? My CPU Input voltage is not drooping much, and my PSU is rock steady with that load. I need to work on the VCore.

    As usual with non-DC Haswell processors, heat and VCore are the limiting factors. Ken has better cooling than I do, plus his VCore is much lower. The low VCore is key IMO, and is what makes DC processors better than the others.

    I don't get the inconsistency that you did earlier, actually my results are very tight in min - max range. Your CPU Input varies much more than mine does, you should check your CPU Load-Line Calibration, I have mine set at 2. My VRM temperatures never broke 36C, so the board is not the limitation, nor my PSU. I know my 4670K is not a great over clocker.

  2. #42
    profJim's Avatar
    profJim is online now Chief Munchkin + moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tacoma, WA. [USA]
    Posts
    7,811

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    An old but useful LinX guide: How to run LinPack stress test(LinX/IBT)properly-an explanation(maybe a guide)

    You can test your system with an older, pre-AVX version of the Linpack libraries, probably an early 0.6.4 version or the 0.6.3 version from https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/892376/all
    You should also be able to download and temporarily replace the 0.6.5 Linpack libraries in the LinX folder with an older version of the pre-AVX libraries from 2009 or early 2010.

    An ideal minimum to maximum GFlops range is within 0.05 to 0.10 GFlops during each test run.

    As I recall, with a Sandy Bridge or newer cpu that supports the AVX instructions, the GFlops scores would be about 60% - 75% higher when you tested with the Linpack libraries that support AVX.
    Q9650 @ 4.10GHz [9x456MHz]
    P35-DS4 [rev: 2.0] ~ Bios: F14
    4x2GB OCZ Reaper PC2-8500 1094MHz @5-5-5-15
    MSI N460GTX Hawk Talon Attack (1GB) video card <---- SLI ---->
    Seasonic SS-660XP2 80 Plus Platinum psu (660w)
    WD Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB (data)
    Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD (boot)
    SLI @ 16/4 works when running HyperSLI
    Cooler Master 120XL Seidon push/pull AIO cpu water cooling
    Cooler Master HAF XB computer case (RC-902XB-KKN1)
    Asus VH242H 24" monitor [1920x1080]
    MSI N460GTX Hawk (1GB) video card
    Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 Speakers
    win7 x64 sp1 Home Premium
    HT|Omega Claro plus+ sound card
    CyberPower CP1500PFCLCD UPS
    E6300 (R0) @ 3.504GHz [8x438MHz] ~~ P35-DS3L [rev: 1.0] ~ Bios: F9 ~~ 4x2GB Kingston HyperX T1 PC2-8500, 876MHz @4-4-4-10
    Seasonic X650 80+ gold psu (650w) ~~ Xigmatek Balder HDT 1283 cpu cooler ~~ Cooler Master CM 690 case (RC-690-KKN1-GP)
    Samsung 830 128GB SSD MZ-7PC128B/WW (boot) ~~ WD Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB (data) ~~ ZM-MFC2 fan controller
    HT|Omega Striker 7.1 sound card ~~ Asus VH242H monitor [1920x1080] ~~ Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 Speakers
    win7 x64 sp1 Home Premium ~~ CyberPower CP1500PFCLCD U.P.S
    .


  3. #43
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    Oops, sloppy terminology on my part. I should have wrote AVX2 instructions, which are unique to Haswell processors.

    The next question is do the linpack libraries in the 0.6.5 version have AVX2 instructions. The dates on the libraries are later than the release of Haswell processors. Since Intel provides those libraries, without further research, I assume they do.

    Since I normally don't run these stress tests much, and running AVX2 instructions is realistic for Haswell processors IMO, I won't be changing to the earlier libraries. Also to maintain apples to apples comparisons, using the same libraries is essential.

    Your idea is certainly valid and would work.

    AIDA64 allows AVX2 instructions to be enabled or disabled. Prime95 pre-AVX2 versions can be found, or may even have an AVX2 switch by now.

    That LinX/IBT guide is... interesting. It does implicitly make a good point, there are many variables that affect benchmark results, and every PC will be different in widely varying degrees. Comparing benchmarks and then being worried when ours are worse than others is a waste of time.

    Running these benchmarks in Windows Safe Mode would be the simplest way to get a more equivalent environment from PC to PC. Not perfect, but improved.

  4. #44
    profJim's Avatar
    profJim is online now Chief Munchkin + moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tacoma, WA. [USA]
    Posts
    7,811

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    Below are the results when I tested my Q9550 @ 4.20GHz in windows safe mode.

    This peak GFlops score was 7.5% higher than my posted 4.20GHz results in post #18 where the peak score was 55.4540 GFlops and the number of processes and threads using safe mode was much lower.


    Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?-f11d-q9550-ep45-ud3p-4-20ghz-988mhz-2-00d-enhance-standard-linx-maxxmem2_safe-mode-crop-png
    Q9650 @ 4.10GHz [9x456MHz]
    P35-DS4 [rev: 2.0] ~ Bios: F14
    4x2GB OCZ Reaper PC2-8500 1094MHz @5-5-5-15
    MSI N460GTX Hawk Talon Attack (1GB) video card <---- SLI ---->
    Seasonic SS-660XP2 80 Plus Platinum psu (660w)
    WD Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB (data)
    Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD (boot)
    SLI @ 16/4 works when running HyperSLI
    Cooler Master 120XL Seidon push/pull AIO cpu water cooling
    Cooler Master HAF XB computer case (RC-902XB-KKN1)
    Asus VH242H 24" monitor [1920x1080]
    MSI N460GTX Hawk (1GB) video card
    Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 Speakers
    win7 x64 sp1 Home Premium
    HT|Omega Claro plus+ sound card
    CyberPower CP1500PFCLCD UPS
    E6300 (R0) @ 3.504GHz [8x438MHz] ~~ P35-DS3L [rev: 1.0] ~ Bios: F9 ~~ 4x2GB Kingston HyperX T1 PC2-8500, 876MHz @4-4-4-10
    Seasonic X650 80+ gold psu (650w) ~~ Xigmatek Balder HDT 1283 cpu cooler ~~ Cooler Master CM 690 case (RC-690-KKN1-GP)
    Samsung 830 128GB SSD MZ-7PC128B/WW (boot) ~~ WD Caviar Black WD6401AALS 640GB (data) ~~ ZM-MFC2 fan controller
    HT|Omega Striker 7.1 sound card ~~ Asus VH242H monitor [1920x1080] ~~ Logitech Z-5500 Digital 5.1 Speakers
    win7 x64 sp1 Home Premium ~~ CyberPower CP1500PFCLCD U.P.S
    .


  5. #45
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    Nice, and there we have it, proof that fewer background processes allow a CPU to score higher in benchmarks. Not that this is a surprise IMO.

    We can also see in the Safe Mode test that the time of each iteration and the GFLOPs results are very consistent and their range is smaller than in the normal Windows mode. The normal mode test shows almost a two second difference (1.951 seconds) in the shortest and longest iteration, while in Safe mode the difference is 0.261 seconds.

    Ken, I am 90% sure the variations you saw in your first stock speed test were simply caused by Windows processes using CPU resources. The time difference you had there is only 0.563 seconds, so not that much anyway.

    The speed of the processor will affect the length of each iteration, with slower processors taking longer. That affect caries over to the range of speed variations.

    A very rough comparison with the Safe Mode processes and threads seen above, my Win 10 TP with Firefox and HWiNFO running shows 59 processes and 787 threads.

  6. #46
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    Still beating on this thread, the forum is slow lately...

    My Haswell Xeon without Hyper-Threading:

    Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?-linx-4-13-2015-1-59-52-am-png

    Not in safe mode. I suppose the hard core over clocking crowd is aware of this, just noobs like me aren't.

    So would you rather have four threads at 184GFLOPs or eight threads at 163GFLOPs?

    Or is all that matters is a high OC speed?

    EDIT: Not sure what happened to that pic, but fixed now.
    Last edited by parsec; 04-14-2015 at 11:45 AM. Reason: Fixed.

  7. #47
    Ken429 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Valapariso, Indiana
    Posts
    516

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    I think we should change the title of this thread - the LinX Contest?!

    Are you trying to keep your attachment a secret? Attachment 7711 won't display for me.

    I am getting more confused every time I run an new iteration of LinX. Looks like disabling Hyper Threading and running memory set to 2048 and then 4096 gives a different GFlop result. Is that normal? I had hoped that disabling Hyper Threading might reduce the Vcore required and also the core temps so I could increase the multiplier and get past 46 but that was not to be. In fact the maximum core temp reached 86C during the 4096 run.

    Now I understand, the site must be broke since I can not add an attachment either.

  8. #48
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    Yes, seems to be a little something not right with the post editor. Just fixed the picture, hopefully it will stay.

    You don't seem to be reading Prof Jim's post about LinX.

    Increasing the amount of memory used during the tests changes the GFLOP results, they should be higher. The time each iteration takes is longer too. Since each iteration runs longer at ~100% core usage, your core temperatures will increase.

    You may not notice this with your CPU cooler's fans and fan speed configuration, but LinX does not run the CPU cores at 100% usage throughout the entire test, or each iteration. You have seen the change in core usage in HWiNFO when LinX runs, right? The minimal memory tests don't stay at high core usage for very long, but use more memory and they last longer. My CPU cooler's fan speed is going up and down all the time in a "short" test, meaning the core temperatures are going up and down constantly.

    Disabling Hyper-Threading increased my GFLOP results on my Xeon, I don't see why your CPU would be different.

    I know disabling Hyper-Threading is a common trick in over clocking, it may only help stability rather than temperatures. A CPU core can only do so much work, and apparently the amount of additional components in a CPU to allow for hyper threading is small. You should research that question or test it more thoroughly before deciding if it is worth disabling.

  9. #49
    Ken429 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Valapariso, Indiana
    Posts
    516

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    Thought I'd add the screen dump that should of gone with a previous post. The forum software would not let me add it for a day or two. Like I said above, I was hoping I could "cheat" and get to 250 GFlops by disabling Hyper Threading and increasing the multiplier but the max core temps were already beyond what I would consider reasonable and "safe".
    Attached Images Attached Images Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?-linx_4790k_46_nohyperthreading_2048_4096-jpg 

  10. #50
    parsec's Avatar
    parsec is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    4,824

    Default Re: Windows Only Sees Sata_0 and Sata_1 on ASR Z97X Killer MB?

    Darn close to 250GFLOPs, that's just a nice round number, your results are great.

    I'd like to see what a comparable Haswell-E processor would do in LinX. Getting one to 4.6GHz would be difficult, the highest stock clock is the 5930K, 3.7GHz max Turbo. Quite a bit more of an OC than a 4970K at 4.6GHz. It might (should) do the same at a lower clock speed.

    The thermal throttling temp for the non-E Haswell processors is 100C. My 4670K thermal throttled running AIDA64 with a Corsair H60, I forget the OC, probably 4.4GHz.

    Intel is normally conservative about their products, so if thermal throttling occurs there is little if any danger of damage if it happens a few times. If the CPU shut itself off due to high temperature, then I would be worried about potential damage, but that is just a guess.

    Your specs list the water block you have, I'm curious what radiator and fans you are using. Just curious what your setup is.

    You can see now why the "delidding" craze is a reality with these Haswell processors. I'm not suggesting it, but some swear by it. Given the payback of the few OCs we've done here, I don't see the point beyond reaching an OC speed simply to do so. That's a fine thing to do, but not what I care about.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •