Did my qx9650 die?

[McCartney]

Hi guys

Check this out:

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/8118/wtfuk7.jpg

Is my CPU dead? Is only 1 core alive now?
WTF !?!?!?


Sorry for sounding rather rude, but I'm a little worried my expensive CPU is dead!
Everest is reporting all 4 CPU core temps as the same.
BIOS says 4 CPUs and I checked my CPU settings no cores are disabled.

What the heck happenedh ere? Is one core left and my CPU is reading core1's speed as all 4 cores?!

I have Instance replacement on the chip so I'm not terribly worried abuot the chip dying but rather what the heck is going on and what can cause this.

My setup:
STriker 2 Extreme
Dominator 4gb 1800 Mhz DDR3
9800 GTX SLI
QX9650
Stock cooling.


Thanks.

 

[krnmastersgt]

Try out the latest Coretemp and see if you have the same problem. Possibilities in my opinion are:

1) The temp sensors are whacked
2)Everest is reporting the temps it gets off 1 core for all 4
3)Absolutely no temp delta, which would be totally awesome

 

[McCartney]

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/6088/wtfya5.jpg

Wow... Good job intel.
I didn't even exceed any specifications. What fuck tards.

 

[krnmastersgt]

Try a BIOS update if it's saying all your cores are enabled and only 1 actually is.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Run the latest mult-core version of Prime95 and open task manager (performance tab) and see if your getting 100% usage on all four cores

 

[McCartney]

I already did this
and there is only 1 instance in prime
I checked my bios, it's the latest.
I said all cores are enalbed and they are... It's just dead I guess.

 

[krnmastersgt]

Hmmm, strange case indeed. Were all 4 cores working before you overclocked it?

 

[McCartney]

They were working 2 minutes before I reboooted.
Then some BSOD camed with some odd file. some CL.sys file.
Then all of a sudden 4 cores died, and they have to be dead if everest and coretemp are both having the same issue.
I made sure all 4 cores are enabled too!

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: McCartney
They were working 2 minutes before I reboooted.
Then some BSOD camed with some odd file. some CL.sys file.
Then all of a sudden 4 cores died, and they have to be dead if everest and coretemp are both having the same issue.
I made sure all 4 cores are enabled too!

1. i think its windows and not your chip because if bios picks it up, then its there. I trust bios more then windows to be honest.

2. If you did kill your chip, it wouldnt be booting up, or windows would funct out. This is why im thinkn its windows because its only picking up 1 cpu and its booting.

3. If you have another board, try that out and see if it is indeed the chip.

4. What votlage were you running at? because i think i may have to tune mine down. :X

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
1. i think its windows and not your chip because if bios picks it up, then its there. I trust bios more then windows to be honest.

I completely agree. You've ruined your Windows install, by overclocking to high, with not enough Vcore or overclocking your RAM too high. I'm betting that all you need is a Windows reinstall.

 

[Rubycon]

I've never seen a Windows install hosed where it reports only one CPU. That means the uniprocessor HAL replaced the multiprocessor? Something is strange in Kansas.

Try a full power off, then CMOS reset.

I've had a system boot with three cores once and a full power cycle restored no. 4.

 

[McCartney]

That's exactly what I thought Rubycon.
I love how people who don't know the CPU's ability to show up properly in windows no matter how F'd up the install is.
The fact of the matter is that it booted slower and choppier, and one core is showingup.

Nonetheless I dropped it off at the place so they can test it and get back to me.
I watched my volts very carefully but somehow I'm not impressed or surprised that they died the way they did.
No matter what GTL refs I used on mild OC's, core 4 would always die, sometimes 2 as well.

There was evident weakness in the chip well-before this death.

One guy on xs.org said someone "msconfigged" me, but I asked myself how the hell only 1 processor shows up in device manager, cpuz, coretemp and everest? These programs bypass bios settings sometimes, eg; My reference design 790i had the cas8 bug awhile ago, and when I'd set cas7 it'd display 8 in bios but in CPU-z it reported as 7; properly...

Any idea rubeS? May just pay more and size up to a 9770, but I hear they're weak.

 

[McCartney]

I tried a restart and a shutdown/restart ruby, no go.
The problem I have is the cores dying. If they've died once I"m not taking it back, happening once is more than enough for me.

If they say there's nothing wrong with it and it's an issue only for me then I'll take it and see what happens. I don't think I should have to power cycle due to cores dying, should I?
I did multiple restarts and put all my settings back to auto.

 

[Rubycon]

9770's are o/c 9650's! :Q

I've tried both and have a 9650 that beats the 9770 hands down. Of course another 9650 needs a vcore boost at anything over 3.2. Cooling is with a TRUE and ambient temps are in the lower 20C range. The better 9650 will do 4GHz at stock voltage and needs 1.3 to reach 4.2GHz. :Q

I have some GO6600's and those are hot tamales. :laugh: One does 400x9 at 1.23 volts and starts needing serious volts above 3.87GHz. The other stops at 425x9 regardless of voltage. This one is strange too as it was doing 3.6GHz for days with the stock cooler (1.3V) and priming at insane temps :Q

EDIT:

Do you have another board to try it in?

My "weaker" 9650 is surprisingly stout. I even gave it 1.77 overnight with OCCT and it freaking passed (temps in upper 80's) at 4.22. It did not die. But like OC lottery perhaps the fate of the chips is the same too.

 

[McCartney]

my 9650 I had was a "T" batch so I didn't want to let it go
Volts didn't seem to b other it but it seemed to be something else.
I'd get teh same core dying at 1.40 vtt or 1.30
Same went for vcore.

I do have another bed to test it in but it's too much work, I'd rather have them check it out and get back to me.
Much easier hwen you have instaswap warranty

 

[OCGuy]

Something sure doesnt seem right about this whole thing....

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Something sure doesnt seem right about this whole thing....

his other 3 cores are being lazy or got drunk off as5?

Anyhow let us know what that repair shop says.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

hey there mccartney. looks like you fucked up your overclocking =)
told ya to be careful in the past if you didn't know what u were doing.

+ you blame intel for messing up because you went out of your warranty and decided to overclock? not so bright..
+ watching your volt measurements in windows isn't so bright either..

why did u drop it off somewhere to test? you must trust those people more than you trust yourself.. i would never let someone else touch my PC whose skills about stability testing is unknown..



now,
1. take out your cmos battery
2. load defaults in bios + set manual voltages for ram and CPU
3. if you think your ram is bad, memtest each stick of ram
4. assuming all ram is well, reformat and reinstall windows and bare drivers.
5. download latest OCCT beta and test 2h for RAM + 2h for CPU.
6. assuming thats all pass, p95 v24.6 (or later) for 24 hours to test for PSU/long term CPU stability
7. assuming thats all pass, install your programs again.

 

[aigomorla]

ouch... but to the point louis. :X

if you were warned about windows getting messed up when overclocking, then yes, i think your windows is borked and all you need is a good reformating, and cmos reset.

 

[McCartney]

It's called I read bios voltages which were 1.325v and 1.30 for CPU vcore and VTT respectively.
I didn't drop my PC any where, I dropped off my CPU along with the box for a replacement.
I've never talked to you about overclocking either.
Plus if you think I'm going to take your advice when I've never asked you for any, and then give me suggestions I think are noob worthy.
I lived and died by the AT oc'ing guide, I didn't exceed any spec voltages, the fact that you think I did tells me all I need to know; you're jumping to conclusions.


Plus if you think intel won't replace it you're nuts, I didn't say they wouldn't. In fact I know they would.
Did you read my instore replacement part or are you jumping the gun as usual? You seem to do that often.
You spend so much on your PC that you revel in the ability totake shots at people who can afford things you spend all your paycheque on.

Before you give me computer advice, which I don't need from you since i"ve looked up your history; I suggest you get your priorities in life straight.
OC'ing for me is a hobby, if my 9650 is gone and will not be replaced, so be it. I'll buy another one. I know they will replace it, if they don't it gives me an excuse to go to a 9770, and that for me is another excuse to buy something i want.

I respect everyone's opinion on this board, exception of Louiss since he often doesn't prove his point and oversteps his boundary.

It's not my RAM, whoever told you my cores can die because of ram is foolish.
It's not my software, whoever told you that? Again, I could easily prove it isn't but I"ll just scan the receipt of the replaced qx9650.
This should put your opinoin in my threads to rest, since I do not like your disrespectful and misinformed posts.

And whoever thinks this is a software related issue, tell me what drivers are needed to load multicore processors?
As Rubycon said:

I've never seen a Windows install hosed where it reports only one CPU. That means the uniprocessor HAL replaced the multiprocessor? Something is strange in Kansas.

Thanks.

 

[Quiksilver]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
if you were warned about windows getting messed up when overclocking, then yes, i think your windows is borked and all you need is a good reformating, and cmos reset.

I agree with this.
If you look at his everest image, it is reporting 1 processor and 4 cores. Device manager is right too, you only have one physical processor. Core temp seems to see the 4 cores too (indicated by it say number of cores: 4) it's just not picking up the temps of the cores. If your cores were dead, you would be encountering way more problems than this anyway.

The obvious here would be to do as they are suggesting, set BIOS back to it's defaults and then reset CMOS (by pulling the bettery and letting it sit for 30 minutes, or using the pins/switch). Then manually set all defaults for your processor, memory, etc. (I personally have never left the motherboard do any of that for me). Then reformat your operating system/hard drive. Then be sure to install any and all multi-cores patches if needed. Then check all this out again.

 

[McCartney]

CoreTemp is NOT picking up all 4 cores.
I cannot navigate in the tabs.

You do know that each processor is apart of a quad core, and as such in the microcode, even if one processor is working that means it's going to say it's a quad core when really one is active.

It's like quadruplets. They're all the same, if all 4 used to travel together and 3 die... Well he's still apartof routine.

I'd find it hard tobelieve that intel said "Ok if 3 cores die, we're gonna report 1 core". That screws up the microcode. I am pretty sure quad core processors are labelled quad core for a reason, and if a few die it's still going to report as such.

 

[Quiksilver]

Originally posted by: McCartney
Plus if you think I'm going to take your advice when I've never asked you for any, and then give me suggestions I think are noob worthy.

Too be fair actually you did ask for somewhat of advice in your first post, when you asked us does anyone here know what is happening?

Plus if you think intel won't replace it you're nuts, I didn't say they wouldn't. In fact I know they would.
Did you read my instore replacement part or are you jumping the gun as usual? You seem to do that often.

I'm really not sure what your trying to say here, are you suggesting that you are going to lie to intel and get it replaced or that you know you broke the warranty guidelines and are not going to try. In any case, what replacement processor?

Before you give me computer advice, which I don't need from you since i"ve looked up your history; I suggest you get your priorities in life straight.
OC'ing for me is a hobby, if my 9650 is gone and will not be replaced, so be it. I'll buy another one. I know they will replace it, if they don't it gives me an excuse to go to a 9770, and that for me is another excuse to buy something i want.

Who exactly was this aimed at? Aigmorla or Louis?

It's not my RAM, whoever told you my cores can die because of ram is foolish.
It's not my software, whoever told you that?

Eh? You mentioned something about getting a BSOD and upon reboot you had this problem, this tell me it is actually indeed either a) software issue, b) memory issue, c) bios issue.

I just think you need to stop getting all pissed off cause were voicing our opinions and just relax.

 

[McCartney]

Aimed at louiss, aigo I have no problem with.
Louisss is just revelling in picking on people in his "did you know that" tone.

I was getting BSODs when I had higher overclocks, which I turned down to stock, and had this problem.

Like I said, I have instant replacement on it after they verify my issue. I don't know how you guys can think it's a software issue.
Just because bios reports something doesn't mean it's right, I mean with or without virtualization I'm only seeing(or saaw) 1 physical processor thing in the hardware of device manager

 

[Quiksilver]

Originally posted by: McCartney
I was getting BSODs when I had higher overclocks, which I turned down to stock, and had this problem.

Where you experiencing any of these problems, at the stock speeds while you--- er, did you make sure you were 100% stable using prime95 and what not, because you never mention it despite being an avid overclocker, did you also moniotr your temperatures during this period of time?

Like I said, I have instant replacement on it after they verify my issue. I don't know how you guys can think it's a software issue.
Just because bios reports something doesn't mean it's right, I mean with or without virtualization I'm only seeing(or saaw) 1 physical processor thing in the hardware of device manager

I still think it is a software issue, not because of just the BIOS, but the fact device manager is correct (and it is, you only have one physical processor; it's not going to go show the cores on-die), and that everest shows all the cores too.

Why don't you give CPU-Z a try and see if it shows up there. It should look like this.