trodas

Tried TRFC relaxing to 13 from 11 and it seems to work more stable: But it still failed. So I tried TRFC 14 and TRC 8 (as compared to well working TRFC 11 and TRC 7) and it crashed even in YouTube video... so, very bad. More relaxed timings = worser stability. What it this?!

I disagree. I did not want to cause any stir, but I do believe that the original Aquamark3 will run for Masterchief79 just fine, as it did for me on the nVidia Vanta LT. I would suggest him to try and report back. I do believe that there is some wrapper error... Because these cards are somewhat crappy (Vanta LT = no no, for me - I put there ATI Rage 3D Pro 128 (yet another crap card) and it worked just fine w/o reinstalling windows or HWbot Aquamark wrapper or changing anything else) ... And what is even more important, that the original Aquamark 3 run at default settings on the pesky Vanta LT. That itself seems to prove that the settings are irellevent - eg. get reported as "can't work with default settings:, but in fact it work when started alone.

Nope, both sticks are double sided. IMHO the time to first error is important, since it seems to be more stable with tighter timings (it can take the Prime 95 memory test longer and fail only when getting into the bigger FFT...) ... And given the settings, relaxing the memory frequency did not seems to be a option, as 229MHz fit very nicely with the 250/183 divider and using 166MHz divider will kill the memory speed way too much. The question is - what timings to relax, when these ALMOST work stable. Not what frequency to change...

My Cinebench test is still not linked to the NTB/Quanta 30BB mainboard! Bump for fix!

And once again this weird behaviour - relaxed timings TRC from 7 to 9 and TRFC from 11 to 12 - give error just sooner...! WTF if going on there

My score is STILL not there: http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/30bb/ ...so bump for a fix!

Nope, did not have pic of chips... There are heatspreader: Funny fact: relaxing the TRAS to 8 did not help as well. Oh, well... So as next I trying relaxing the TRC from 7 to 9 and TRFC from 11 to 12, but it still looks bad as WOT suddently quit on me, so... Ideas need.

Guys, these lame Kingston Technology two 512MB sticks have bad even the SPD values: 2.5-3-3-8 (at least at 2.5V), but I wonder, if someone can suggest how to push them beyond 229MHz. Because they did not make the 229MHz even stable. They seems to work: ...but then fail bad I did not exactly want to reduce the O/C, so I was tweaking as much, as I can and get them at these timings: To run semi-stable. Good for benches, bad for usage. What shocked me, that for example even 2.90V to them did not improve stability a bit (in fact, things get worser...!!!). So auto (therefore around the 2.5V) seems to work best. Then I tried relaxing the TRRD, TRWT from 2 to 3, but again things get - worser! WTF! Then I tried the Async Latency from 7 to 8nS and it get... worser. Unsurprisingly things get worser at 6nS too... But the 8nS was surprising to me. Someone can enlighten me there...? As the mobo, it is a Asus A8R32-MVP Deluxe (Radeon Xpress 3200) and the Opty can take over 2800MHz at 1.425Vcore, tested, so no problemo there. But the rams do suxx, so... There are the important bios settigs: (on the sidenote, when I saw the SPD, then I realized that the TRAS values for 200MHz was 8 and I used 7, as recommended for AMD64 memory controler, so might there I should start...? SPD values for 166MHz are 2-3-3-7, but at 229MHz I'm far from 166MHz...)

Bump for the fix

I gotta report that the latest wrapper (v2.55.110) works fine on WinXP SP3 czech (32bit) at Operon 148 - w/o a single glitch: http://hwbot.org/submission/2484330_trodas_aquamark_geforce_8600_gt_256mb_gddr3_97236_marks (and fastest score for the Asus A8R32-MVP Deluxe as well, witch is LOL, because the 8600 GT is crap and I did not even overclock it yet - only replaced caps for polymers, not even improved cooling, nothing...)

Bump for fix (probably manual) to this score

Me neither... I was about to suggest that Firefox v3.1 beta 3 might not be the most up to date browser, but on the other hand, the remaining two submissions (where I used just the propopulate function!) get "nailed" to the Quanta 30BB mobo pretty nicely and w/o any glitch. Hence unless something could be found out of this, then maybe manually "tie" this result to the Quanta 30BB mobo...? Because like I say - it is not there, not recognized as test that belong to this mainboard.

Bump for someone to notice that there IS a problem... (because, obviously, the score is still not there, so... there we have a little problem out there)

Looks like not even on the OC inside forum anyone can help me to understand what is going on: http://www.forum-inside.de/cgi-bin/forum/topic.cgi?forum=14&topic=214 That is sad

BUMP for fix, still not there!

Oh my... what happend? What do you do these poor cards, mate?

BUMP - still not there: http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/30bb/'>http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/30bb/ Funny thing - on the submited score: http://hwbot.org/submission/2479951_ ...one can click on the "Model: 30BB" link and then - viola! - one end up at this page, that belong to the Quanta 30BB mainboard: http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/30bb/ Surprisingly, the Cinebench result is STILL not there. WTF?!

Bump for fixing this (I have no idea, why other benchmarks does it right and this one does not "stick" the the Quanta 30BB mobo...)

...and still not there... WTH is going on?

Agreed, sorry for OT ...

Nobody claims it is immediatelly. But when LATER submissions (hint: I mentioned that: "I used the "prepopulate" function" - so these submissions must be later) are visible and added that the Cinebench one is still NOT visible even today: http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/30bb/ ...then I want to complain bad!

That is why there is the crotch zip... Search for Valerie Tramell and you get plenty of her shoots and vids. She can walk with boots, that will make me fail so bad, that I would need a wheelchair... ( http://ulozto.cz/xCTJWbPh/valerie-tramell-sexy-prochazka-v-latexu-mp4 ) Actually I asked Val, how she can do it o well, as you can see in the vid, and she claimed it is not her most crazy boots and that it was easy, witch I find somewhat hard to believe. But, well, you can judge for yourself

No, I mean that when submited the Cinebench score, it is NOT tied to the mainboard 30BB... therefore is not there: http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/30bb/'>http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/30bb/ That problem. Look there: http://hwbot.org/submission/2479951_trodas_cinebench_r11.5_core_duo_t2350_0.88_points "Mainboard details - # Model: 30BB" But do you see it there? http://hwbot.org/hardware/motherboard/30bb/ No? Me also not... so that is the trouble there...

I want to complain! (nothing new, yes, I know... but still) RANT! I submited the Cinebench score and... it is not visible for the board. http://hwbot.org/submission/2479951_trodas_cinebench_r11.5_core_duo_t2350_0.88_points So... since it contain also the CPU-Z, then I could use it as CPU speed and reference clock submissions and quess what! Both these (even I used the "prepopulate" function for the next ones) are well visible for the board: http://hwbot.org/submission/2479954_trodas_reference_clock_30bb_133.05_mhz http://hwbot.org/submission/2479953_trodas_cpu_frequency_core_duo_t2350_1863_mhz ...but not the Cinebench. What is going on?

Close enough....?