Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Gigabyte GA-7VRXP posting problem




  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Does anyone know what the modification was between the ver 1.0 and 1.1 board was and why was this done?

    And what was the difference between batch c,d,e,were there further modifications?

    Were there only 3 batches or were there more and why would batch c not work and a batch e work.

    This just donít make any sense to me unless there were modifications in the batches as well or were they just having a bad day when they produced batch c.

    I understand that the upgrade or fix on ver 2.0 is 1 capacitor and 1 resistor only. Is this true.

    If anyone knows what is the truth Id love to know and not I think this is what they did.

    I had a ver 1.1 (at least a ver 1.1 on the sticker) but under system diagnostics it appeared as a ver 1.0 and it was a batch E and it was a piece 'O' CRAP so donít believe that just because it was a certain batch number that it will be okay.

    I can not Get Gigabyte to reply to any E mails.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    You should have read this thread, http://forums.tweaktown.com/showthre...;threadid=3607 , and that would have answered ya questions. ;)
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Have already read that and no it does not.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    1,514

    Default

    So basically wiggo you can't really tell until you get the baord in your hands? Do you think any of the batch "c" boards are being sold via internet stores?
    New Sig soon, old one was way outdated.

    :thumb:

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    18

    Default

    pga1234

    I returned the ver 1.1 for a 2.o and this is what I'm on right now.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    1,514

    Default

    Ok, your post just really confused me. I have no idea of what your point is...
    New Sig soon, old one was way outdated.

    :thumb:

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    1,514

    Default

    Well I mean I get what you are saying. You had a 1.1 didn't work or you wanted the 2.0 so you returned it and got a 2.0. And currently you are using the 2.0. But what relevancy does that have to my post?
    New Sig soon, old one was way outdated.

    :thumb:

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    It was only certain "C" batches that were the problem but if you got one then it would be fixed. If you're buyin' over the internet then no you wouldn't know what you have till ya got it but most of the earlier versions should be about out of circulation by now. :smokin:
    <center>:cheers:</center>

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    1,514

    Default

    Ok, that's good to know. Thanks Wiggo.
    New Sig soon, old one was way outdated.

    :thumb:

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •