The Slow Quad Core

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
Hello, everyone. I?m a computer technician at a locally owned repair shop and I?ve encountered a job that?s so mind-boggling, I?m turning to strangers for help. I?ll start by telling you exactly what it is I?m working on, and then I?ll detail the specifics of what I?ve done. If there?s a format I should be using (I didn?t see a sticky or anything), I?ll gladly update this to reflect that layout.

* Microsoft Windows Vista Business running XP Pro
* Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz 8M Processor
* 4GB PC6400 800MHz DDR2 Dual Channel Memory (1GB x 4)
* Intel DQ35JO S775 mATX Motherboard
* 500GB 7200RPM 3G SATA II Hard Drive
* GeForce 8600GT 512MB PCIE Video (1DVI / 1VGA)
* 350 Watt Power Supply
* 20X DVDRW Dual Layer + 16X DVD ROM Drive
* 9-in-1 USB Card Reader

The astute among you will notice the minuscule power supply. This is an Infotel built computer and while they?ve not been useless, they haven?t been able to help me pinpoint my current problem.

It first came in with the report of ?running too slowly.? And on first boot, I definitely agreed. XP took a good two minutes to fully load. Any basic explorer functions like opening a folder took approximately four to six seconds. Yikes. So, I began poking around in the BIOS and found that the RAM was set to nominal, 6-5-5-18. The correct timing is 5-5-5-12 for this particular RAM so once I set it, it began to behave completely normally. Except once games were loaded, it?d crash. Once I found out the power supply was only 350w and that 8600GTs require that as a minimum, not including the Intel Quad Core monster sitting a few inches above it in the case, I called Infotel and they very promptly shipped us a 500w power supply to install in the unit.

Once the new power supply was installed, the computer ran as expected: load times were excellent. And so we sent the computer home with him.

He calls back two weeks later and said, ?It was working fine for the first week, but now it?s just as slow as before.?

Sure enough, it was running like crap. I did a cursory examination of the software to make sure he hadn?t installed any malware or any crap. We had previously given him several preventative measures like AVG Free and Spybot S&D, and none of those reported any anomalies, nor were there any indication that he had used the machine much at all. Even BIOS was running slowly when I went in to make sure that the timing on the RAM was still correct. I updated video drivers from nvidia.com; flashed BIOS from intel.com; and I even regreased and remounted the processor. The Seagate hdd test and the Drive Fitness Test came back totally fine.

I removed one stick of RAM and booted the computer. Voila! Works totally fine. ?Easy enough,? I thought to myself. ?It?s just a bad slot or a bad stick.? Nope. Switching the RAM around yielded the same results. And when I put the 4th stick back in, it began running normally again. Seriously. I pulled it back out and began booting with random RAM sticks in random slots; everything worked fine with 2, 3, and 4 sticks of RAM in any combination of slots.

I spent two days running the computer with some serious loads from benchmarks (3D Mark, SANDRA) to iTunes, Windows Media Player with a DVD, and a game all running. I maintained this level of intensity for hours at a time with no overheating or lag issues. I attempted completely removing the paging file and then re-enabling it, and the performance difference was nil. It was running exactly like it should have.

I finally resigned myself to giving it back to the customer (who is very polite and patient) and telling him the moment sometime goes wrong to bring it right back to us. I was really disappointed I wasn?t able to ?break? it again to see where the problem was.

I was finishing up my paperwork and getting ready to carry the now-disconnected computer to the other room after I got off the phone with him, and my coworker asked me if I had re-enabled the paging file. I hadn?t, and to the best of my understanding, you don?t need to have a HUGE page file, and that approximately 100 or so megs minimum is plenty. I plugged it back in, and then it started running crappily again. o_O

I turned the page file back on, restarted, and it kept running crappily. I turned it off, restarted, and it was still running crappily.

Every time I try to pin down exactly what?s going wrong with this, it avoids the variables I set up.

So, what do you all think?
 

robisbell

Banned
Oct 27, 2007
3,621
0
0
go to http://housecall.trendmicro.com and have it fully scan the system and report back the results
install "CCleaner" and run both the "Cleaner" option multiple times till it reports no errors, then run the "Registry" option multiple time till it reports no more errors.
what Antivirus is installed, and running?
what Antispyware is installed and running?
what Antimalware is installed and running?
what BIOS revision is it running?
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
AVG 7.5.516 with virus base 269.20.2/1271.
CCleaner 2.04.543 is installed and has been ran several times already.
SpyBot Search and Destroy 1.5.2 and SuperAntiSpyware is version 3.9.1008 with core 3390.
All Windows XP updates currently available.
BIOS version is 0757 from http://www.intel.com/products/...board/DQ35JO/index.htm

None of the listed security programs have returned any hits or anomalies.
 

robisbell

Banned
Oct 27, 2007
3,621
0
0
is the unit in the shop at the moment? I'd do the 1st like I suggested.
as for CCleaner have you done like I suggested?
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
The unit is still in the shop. CCleaner has already been ran as you suggested; there are no remaining registry errors.

I'll post with the results once the HouseCall has completed.
 

Narse

Moderator<br>Computer Help
Moderator
Mar 14, 2000
3,826
1
81
Are any procceses in task manager using alot of CPU time?
 

Ntrepid8

Junior Member
Feb 12, 2008
2
0
0
What are the specs on the PSU. Specifically how many 12+ rails and what are they rated for? What is the total +12 rating for the PSU? What is the +5 and +3.3 rating? Maybe post a pic of the label on the side of the PSU? Or a link to the specs?
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
Narse, no. All processor functions both while it's "running like crap" and "running normally" are median. This stays the same even after several reboots.

Ch33zw1z, that's possible, but that can only be assumed. I have no way yet to isolate and prove that that's the problem. If I send it to Infotel, they'll just say "it works fine" and ship it back.

Robisbell, CCleaner's Cleaner mode doesn't return errors per se. It just returns stuff that isn't needed. And yes, to be very specific and clear, I've cleaned out the temp files using the Cleaner method and I've performed all the registry fixes using the Registry option.

Ntrepid8, here's a link to the PSU. http://www.tigerdirect.com/app...pNo=1273332&CatId=1079

Again, it's a Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 for those of you looking for more specific info.

http://www.intel.com/design/core2quad/documentation.htm
http://processorfinder.intel.c...tails.aspx?sSpec=SLACR
 

Narse

Moderator<br>Computer Help
Moderator
Mar 14, 2000
3,826
1
81
The fact you said the BIOS was slow makes me wonder if it could be some sort of thermal throttling. Have you checked the CPU temps to ensure this is not the case?
 

Ntrepid8

Junior Member
Feb 12, 2008
2
0
0
What are the specs on the PSU. Specifically how many 12+ rails and what are they rated for? What is the total +12 rating for the PSU? What is the +5 and +3.3 rating? Maybe post a pic of the label on the side of the PSU? Or a link to the specs?
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
Narse, that's one of the reasons I repasted it: I initially thought that was the problem. But, all the cores report temperatures in the lower 20Cs. And it doesn't do the expected behavior of gradually deteriorating performance that would come with a slow overheat, nor does it do the sudden shutdown of a quick overheat.

Ntrepid8, I linked the specs earlier. Did you not see it or was that not what you needed? Pasting it doesn't work very well since I lose all the formatting that's on that link.
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
Update for Robisbell. TrendMicro Housecall returned no errors. And CCleaner has been ran both in Cleaner and Registry mode and returned no further results. It did find the temp files from Housecall, but they're now taken care of.
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
Do you guys think this might be indicative of the RAM being too hot? I just noticed DIMM 0 is pretty close to the processor and was very warm to the touch when I pulled it out. Just now, dropping it back down to 3gb made it start running nice and fast again.

Argh!
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
I have a Core 2 Quad Q6600 at home. My kids use it mainly. They think it is pretty fast running XP with 2 Gigs of RAM. You might look for some revised BIOS updates from Intel. We use an Abit IP35 Prop motherboard. I am not a fan of using 4 sticks of RAM on newer motherboards. A 32 bit OS can not read 4 gigs of RAM, so why bother using it? You might try pulling 2 sticks of RAM out and see what happens. Sometimes on motherboards if you use all 4 RAM slots it actually slows the mother board down.

Usually in cases like this we might suggest you take other peripherals out and see if it makes a difference. For instance the USB card reader could be buggy or need better drivers. Might try disconnecting it and see what happens. Usually removing all peripherals and then connecting them one at a time might be a good way to troubleshoot. Also try pulling the SATA Cable and reconnecting it to see if there is a little tarnish on the connectors. You could try a different SATA Cable. Another idea is looking at the DVD drive. I reccomend a Lite-On SATA 20X DVD. Are you using an SATA DVD?

That motherboard has 2 video outs. Is one of them disabled? I think it has both VGA and Digital DVI connectors. May look at the BIOS and see what it says.

It is possible the Motherboard is bad and needs to be sent back. It may just be buggy.

If you went from Vista Business to XP Pro, did you install the Intel Chipset drivers over?
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
Piasbird:

I've flashed to BIOS to the latest version from Intel.com. I've reconnected the SATA hdd and the IDE optical drives. And I did install the latest version of the Intel chipset drivers. This was manufactured from Infotel and it came with XP Pro preinstalled, so no actual downgrading happened. It's just XP Pro on a Vista license.

I've seemed to narrow it down to: it runs fine with 3gb, and runs like crap with 4gb. The RAM overheat idea I had earlier I don't think is panning out since I put a stick in DIMM 0 and took one of out DIMM 1 and it ran exactly like it should.

Were this my personal system, I'd just deal with having 3gb of RAM, but since this customer did actually pay for 4gb, it's a bit dishonest to send them home with an extra stick of RAM, even if it might not be utilized to its full effect.

I tried disconnecting the optical drives and booting with 4gb and it ran like crap.

I really would prefer not to chalk this up to "well, that's a weird motherboard." Especially since it *did* work fine with 4gb of RAM when I first worked on it, and then again for a few days. And now it's approaching a reproducible pattern of behavior.
 

Crusty

Lifer
Sep 30, 2001
12,684
2
81
If it's a hardware issue then you will experience the same effects if you run a different OS on the machine. Pop a linux livecd in and see if it's any better, if it's not then don't worry about spyware or malware.. in fact in this situation, and given the details you provided I would ignore everything Robisbell has said. He's only wasting your time.

From everything gathered here, I would point your finger at the RAM. Try the RAM in a different known working computer, and try different known working RAM in this computer. Same with the video/cpu if you can. Once you can determine if the parts are all working independently of each other, make sure you do not have any incompatibilities.

Check http://www.intel.com/support/m...sb/CS-027946.htm#dimms for the memory and make sure you are using recommended RAM in the supported configurations.
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
Excellent advise, Crusty. I'll grab my Ubuntu 7.10 CD and try it with 4 gigs.

Robisbell, both the key and the operating system are 32-bit versions. And, on a personal note, I totally love basset hounds; if I lived in MT, I'd definitely get one from the site you link in your signature.
 

robisbell

Banned
Oct 27, 2007
3,621
0
0
I'm glad you do, they are so sweet, and I do what I can to help the rescue get them into loving homes.

okay, you do know 3GB is about the relaistic max the versions of XP and vista can use, correct? that extra stick of ram is wasted on them, and it may have been transferring heat from the cpu into the memory slots or causing other issues, since you removed it and things picked up.
 

Skewer324

Member
Feb 12, 2008
41
0
0
I booted from Ubuntu 7.10.

Timing from hitting enter until Ubuntu was ready to use went as follows:
4gb RAM - ~3m35s
3gb RAM - ~2m20s

A noticeable difference, for sure.

So it's definitely a hardware problem, then?

Originally posted by: robisbell
okay, you do know 3GB is about the relaistic max the versions of XP and vista can use, correct? that extra stick of ram is wasted on them, and it may have been transferring heat from the cpu into the memory slots or causing other issues, since you removed it and things picked up.

Yep; like I said earlier, however, I don't necessarily have that option. I mean, I may end up going with it, but my boss wants all four in there and working, but it just might not happen.

Okay, time for me to go home. I'm sure I'll be back at it tomorrow morning 8.30am EST, so I'll be checking back here.
 

robisbell

Banned
Oct 27, 2007
3,621
0
0
well, windows will nto see or report all 4GB of ram. I'd leave a stick out and tell him that since the OS is not 64bit, it will only see 3GB of ram, if and when he does go to 64bit, slap that stick in and you'll be good to go.
 

Crusty

Lifer
Sep 30, 2001
12,684
2
81
Originally posted by: robisbell
well, windows will nto see or report all 4GB of ram. I'd leave a stick out and tell him that since the OS is not 64bit, it will only see 3GB of ram, if and when he does go to 64bit, slap that stick in and you'll be good to go.

You are an idiot.

You have an attitude PM arriving shortly for that comment.

AnandTech Moderator
mechBgon




Having 4gb of ram will have no performance degradation caused by Windows 32-bit compared to 3gb on the same install. Sure, you will not be able to use most of the last 1gb but it will not be the cause of system wide slowdowns unless it's a HARDWARE problem.

The reason Windows cannot use the full 4GB of ram simply has to do with address space. When running Windows on a machine that uses 32-bit addressing all of the "custom peripherals" that need address space get a chunk of the 32-bit address. So if you have a video card with 512mb of ram, you can automatically assume the most Windows will use of 4gb of RAM is 3.5gb of ram. There are plenty of other devices that require reserved addresses too, that's why you often see close to 3gb of RAM from within Windows. The magic number is NOT 3gb at all, it will be (4gb - total address space needed by other hardware) which usually hovers just over 3gb of usable ram. In fact, there is no magic number really, it's always going to be different depending on the hardware inside.

Back to the OP, it is NOT a waste to have 4gb of RAM in a computer that runs Windows 32-bit. It might not be cost efficient, but it's certainly not a waste. If possible, I would replace the 4x1gb sticks with 2x2gb sticks since you seem to be having compatibility issues. Especially given the pricing of current DDR2, there's no reason to not be running 2x2gb of ram that has been tested by Intel to work with that board. That leaves you with a very easy path of upgrade when a 64-bit OS is loaded without putting a strain on money, especially if the old RAM is not defective and you can use it in a board that won't be so fussy with it.
 

daveybrat

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jan 31, 2000
5,804
1,015
126
You don't want to leave him with 3Gb of ram. Then he won't be running in dual-channel mode like he is currently. You either have to leave him with 2x1GB sticks or but 2x2GB sticks, but do not use 3 sticks of ram in there. You'll degrade his performance.

2GB is pretty decent for WindowsXP and he can always swap them out with 2GB sticks down the road sometime.