VISTA-64 and Stress-Testing problems

[BonzaiDuck]

I don't know if the hardware profile is so relevant now: 680i chipset, new BIOS, dual SATA2 in RAID0 (nVidia controller), dual 9600 GT cards in SLI, 4GB (two successively-tried 4GB 2x2GB RAM kits), Wolfdale/Penryn E8400 processor . . . .


AND . . . . . . . VISTA64

First, I got through the "4GB causes BSOD upon installation" problem. The OEM install DVD was pre-SP1, and I used a 2GB RAM kit to update to SP1.

Then, I began stress-testing with PRIME95 (64-bit version). All good and well with the small-FFTs test. Then I ran Blend-Test, and after 20-minutes, like clockwork every time, I'd get a BSOD. I replaced the RAM-kit with a 2GB kit, and no problem. So I RMA'd the 4GB kit.

Meanwhile, I decided to try a different set of 4GB sticks -- different manufacture, reviews showed high reliability.

Guess what?!! "BSOD after 20 minutes, running PRIME95 Blend-Test." Both kits check out fine with MEMTEST86+ over 13-hour test sessions.

But "20 minutes" is probably indicative of an OS-related problem -- the G$*&MN SCREEN-SAVER. I tried to disable it, but "no cigar" -- it keeps activating after 20 minutes. As I indicated, this seems to coincide with the Blend-test BSOD occurrences -- 20 minutes running.

Does anyone have any suggestions while I continue to trouble-shoot this on my own? I have to notify G.SKILL that the RMA was a mistake.

Eat S***, choke and die -- Burn in Hell, Microsoft and VISTA!! [My choice, though. I wanted to find out both angles: How good it was, and how bad it was, and I wanted a 64-bit OS to play with -- ascertaining the same "good . . . bad" in a more general sense.]

I NEED to get THROUGH this . . . . . and it's not the worst "new-OS" problem I've ever had over the time since Windows 3.0 . . . . . but . . . . . P-I-T-A!!!

 

[bsobel]

Skipping your eat s*** comments which make you look like a 3 year old, you have a hardware problem.

The pre sp1 issue was a bad driver which didn't handle 4gig machines on certain mother boards properly. Once that was fixed, if your blowing up on memtest on that box, look at your memory speed, power supply, etc. I dont think this is Vista related at all.

Also, if you can't right click and turn off the screen saver... Wow, just wow...

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I apologize for my regression to puerility, and will watch my use of asterisks here in the future. Really. I mean it.

I can't see how this is a HW problem if a 2GB kit shows smooth-running, error-free, stress-testing to heart's content, but MEMTEST86+ proven 4GB kits result in these "crashes after 20-minutes BLend-Test."

Also, I discover that disabling the Log-on screen-saver is done through a registry-edit to "ScreenSaverActive" from 1 to 0? When I was running Everest Ult. 4.5 and it's memory stress-test, and as I probably said before, I didn't get BSOD, but the little rotating circle-thingie popped up, the screen went dark except for the windows task-bar, and finally I had to raise Task Manager to kill the running programs and re-start the system.

PSU and other hardware checks out. Ran the LATEST MEMTEST86+ for 13 hours and another 30 iterations of test #5 -- no problem.

If disabling the Logon Screensaver doesn't help, I'll disable SLI, pull one of the GFX cards, reinstall the graphics driver, and see what then.

But as I said -- replace the G.SKILL 4GB with a Crucial 2GB kit -- no problem. Replace the Crucial kit with a Corsair 4GB kit -- same problem. Both the G.SKILLs and the Corsairs go through MEMTEST86+ like a hot knife through butter -- 13, 14 hours before I terminate manually.

The problems -- BSOD with PRIME95 (64-bit) Blend-Test, and a "Windows discovered a problem with Logon-Screen-Saver" running the milder Everest Ultimate 4.50 memory-stress-test -- occur after 20 minutes like clockwork. And regardless of my settings in Control Panel's Power Options -- setting everything to "NEVER," the Logon Screensaver activates in 20 minutes. Right now, I'm testing whether my registry edit for "ScreenSaverActive" has disabled that feature. After that, I'll run Everest again, and if the memory stress-test clicks along for several hours uneventfully, I'll try the PRIME Blend-Test again.

There must be enough people with 680i boards and VISTA 64, or perhaps in combination with single or dual 9600 GT cards, who've been through this sort of thing.

Not ruling out a hardware error completely -- I thought I'd checked out this mobo last year under XP Pro 32-bit, and "no problem." I haven't run the board since then -- I had two of them -- and this one is a spare. And again -- why no problem with a 2GB memory kit in this sucker? But any 4GB kit seems to result in the problems I've described -- after passing MEMTEST86+ for a reasonable number of iterations? Like I said -- at least 13 hours and 20+ iterations of test #5 on top of that . . . .

Update: The screen saver still activates, despite the registry edit and reboot -- as I watch what's happening on the LCD monitor while I type in these remarks on another machine . . . .

 

[bsobel]

Im sorry, I misread that completely, thought you were crashing during memtest in additon to everest. So you crash when the screen saver activates. I'd be looking hard at the video cards and bios then. First make sure you have the latest bios for the box. As for the video cards, are those the latest drivers?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Originally posted by: bsobel
Skipping your eat s*** comments which make you look like a 3 year old, you have a hardware problem.

. . . . . Once that was fixed, if your blowing up on memtest on that box, look at your memory speed, power supply, etc. I dont think this is Vista related at all.

Also, if you can't right click and turn off the screen saver... Wow, just wow...

The modules I've been using and testing were all set to factory defaults and speeds. They're DDR2-800. The G.SKILLs are spec'd at 5,5,5,15, and the Corsairs and Crucials at 4,4,4,12. Again, as I said -- no troubles through marathon MEMTEST86+ testing. The rams are all being run under spec voltages, DDR= 800 Mhz and the latencies I've mentioned.

The PSU is a Seasonic 650HT, used only a couple months with the twin system hardware, and all the voltages check out. You also might be aware of the stellar reviews for that make and model.

No trouble with 2GB kit -- even with screensaver.

Also, I cannot seem to be able to deactivate the screensaver feature. I edited the registry as I said; I've "right-clicked" the desktop and attempted to do it that way; I've entered control panel and Power options. No matter what settings, the logo pops up on the blank screen within 20 minutes.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Originally posted by: bsobel
Im sorry, I misread that completely, thought you were crashing during memtest in additon to everest. So you crash when the screen saver activates. I'd be looking hard at the video cards and bios then. First make sure you have the latest bios for the box. As for the video cards, are those the latest drivers?

As I said -- 20 minutes and BSOD with PRIME95 (64-bit) Blend Test; 20 minutes and "Windows reports a problem with Screensaver" under Everest Ultimate with its memory stress-test.

The drivers were the latest nVidia drivers of two or three weeks ago -- GeForce drivers for 9600 cards and the 64-bit version.

VISTA 64 keeps showing "availability of vid-driver updates" for these cards. I've had bad (though mild and fixable) experiences with downloading HW drivers from Windows (or Microsoft) Update, and am very partial for getting them from the HW vendor, like nVidia for video, or Creative Labs if using a CL SB/Audigy/X-Fi sound card. The sound card in this system is ASUS' own riser card for the on-board sound, and I believe it was developed in conjunct with Creative -- SoundMax and Creative had a joint project a few years back.

But if anything -- beyond an OS or driver glitch -- it may be the graphics cards. I should eventually attempt to pull one and disable SLI, testing each. Or -- attempt to replace the driver -- or reinstall it -- then, if persists, pull the cards and see what develops.

But again -- as I said? If I replace the 4GB kits with a 2GB kit, there is no problem whatever.

 

[bsobel]

But again -- as I said? If I replace the 4GB kits with a 2GB kit, there is no problem whatever.

Things greatly change when you fill up the 32bit address space, lots of drivers still had problems with that (ties to bios memory remapping, etc). Creative took months to get their 64bit drivers to work right with 4gig or more of ram (less than 4 was fine).

Id definately try the WHQL drivers for that card.

Is your bios up to date, what memory remapping functions (if any) do you have enabled/disabled?

 

[Smilin]

Something people often neglect when troubleshooting...

When you are running software it's the same code every pass. Assuming you always provide the same data it will always do the same thing. If something random happens it's not the software.

In your case if you are using Prime95 and Memtest the code is doing basically the same thing over and over. The "input" changes over time (different prime number, different memory row/column) but predictably and in the same way that it does on working machines. If you get random failures in these apps its your hardware not your OS.


If on the other hand the problem is predictable and breaks in the *exact* same place at the exact same time..then it could indeed be software OS. Likely is.

You say your screensaver kicks in a 20 minutes? Do you have the actual screensaver program set to "none" or are you just running things via power management?

Someone (that's clearly got a clue) not being able to control a screensaver is a first for me. That's such a simple mechanism that it's failure is rather ominous. The tasks you are doing shouldn't require much in the way of higher level services. Have you tried the Prime runs in safemode as a workaround? I'd give that a shot.

Also, what is the actual Bugcheck and parameters (check your event logs)?

Can you load up one of the minidumps or memory dumps into windbg and see what the stack looked like at the time.


Also just FYI - the memory tester built into Vista (or on the DVD) is actually better than MemTest *gasp* !! I know, I know memtest rocks, this just rocks more. It has some test patters that memtest doesn't that frequently find problems in a single pass when memtest would have taken multiple or missed altogether. Give it a try instead of memtest as a favor for me...I need more people backing up this bold claim I'm making 🙂

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I sure don't mind answering questions. Two or more heads are better than one. Gotta find time today to notify G.SKILL about my RMA mistake -- the RMA'd kit is in transit to them as we speak, and I need to reverse that.

Meanwhile -- and before pulling GFX cards or anything else -- I trolled nVidia's web-site briefly. There ARE some issues with 9600 GT and VISTA-64, but not identical to mine.

HOW . . . EV-ERRR!! While I downloaded the 9600 GT drivers two or three weeks ago in process if getting to this . . . . state of affairs . . . . I checked Con Panel->System->Device-Mgr to discover that the date of these drivers was not "July 08" but May 08. I think these cards are relatively new on the market. The new driver -- just now showing "Download Complete" on the subject system -- IS dated July 08 -- up from version 175 to version 177.

I think I'm going to dump the old drivers and and install then new ones before pulling any more hardware items. On the Screensaver issue, I'm only guessing that inability to change things at all may be a driver-related issue. Can't tell. The "Fix-lists" for BIOS, drivers etc. never seem to include various fix descriptions.

Like Hyman Roth in "Godfather II," "Dis . . . . is da bidnis . . . . we're in!" and we accept the troubles and frustrations along with it. [We just hope that everything goes "smoothly" -- but . . . .you know . . . . . it never does!]

BACK TO YOUR REMARKS AND QUESTIONS: The BIOS revision from ASUS is v.1603 released in first week of August, 2008 -- this month . . . . and two years after the motherboard was first released. I rather doubt there's a BIOS problem. Only time will tell.

EDIT: Above material was in response to bsobel.

I'm grateful for your input, Smilin.

Yeah -- I have an intuition for what you described. HW . . . . random. Predictable -- likely to be SW or drivers. There may indeed be something wrong with the nVidia drivers, and I just downloaded the updates -- from the GEForce V.175 to V.177. Later is dated last month.

Will check back here later. I've got errands -- other stuff to do -- while I go forward trouble-shooting this. I'll attempt to follow your suggestions as I go. Anyway, any number of things could've happened as I struggled to get beyond the pre-SP1 install-disc for VISTA64. As I said -- VISTA also attempted to install updated drivers, and I prefer getting them from nVidia. Sometime during the installation heartaches and discoveries, Windows had installed those drivers. But as I moved toward successful upgrade to SP1, I installed the nVidia drivers. Best thing may be to completely uninstall and then reinstall the nVidia drivers and see what develops, then on to the list of things you suggest.

 

[QuixoticOne]

PSU and other hardware checks out. Ran the LATEST MEMTEST86+ for 13 hours and another 30 iterations of test #5 -- no problem.

Memtest: I've seen a bad RAM stick crash on certain Memtest tests and not others. I would enable all tests when in doubt. I'm not suggesting that it is bad RAM for you though, just an observation that some tests don't catch (as well) some errors as others.

If disabling the Logon Screensaver doesn't help, I'll disable SLI, pull one of the GFX cards, reinstall the graphics driver, and see what then.

Sounds good. I'd certainly kill the screen saver and try without SLI and without dual installed GPUs. I'd look into updating the NVIDIA drivers to their latest set as well since there are some pretty fresh ones out there.

Have you checked your 'power management' properties? There is a certain profile called 'High (Maximum) Performance' and if you want you can do an advanced edit of what that profile actually does in terms of Min CPU, Max CPU, Screen Saver, monitor power down, hard disc power down, etc. I'd pretty much set all the power management / screensaver things to OFF / maximum performance. You can probably turn off some of the ACPI power management things in your BIOS as well, though if you turn off too many Vista may fail to boot / complain.

Forgive the imprecise answers, I'll have to boot into Vista 64 later on and look at exactly what some of the options / registry keys / et.al. are called.

Try disabling your device drivers for ethernet, USB, sound, et. al. and see if that helps. Try changing the ethernet, USB, disk drivers back to Microsoft default drivers instead of the custom Nvidia ones. Get the latest chipset drivers for your chipset right from NVIDIA's site instead of Windows Update, sometimes WU can be out of date with respect to what it installs, or sometimes it just installs the wrong driver.


Enable full crash dumping and turn off auto-reboot on BSOD so you can see the BSOD and get a full crash dump file that you can check out in the debugger or submit to Microsoft.

Enable Data Execution Prevention = ON, NO EXCEPTIONS unless you have reason to have it use certain exceptions.

Turn off Plug And Play OS = YES (or try it ON if it was OFF) in the BIOS setup and hard reboot.

Does the crash happen if you switch off Aero? Go to a Windows Classic theme?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Originally posted by: QuixoticOne

PSU and other hardware checks out. Ran the LATEST MEMTEST86+ for 13 hours and another 30 iterations of test #5 -- no problem.

Memtest: I've seen a bad RAM stick crash on certain Memtest tests and not others. I would enable all tests when in doubt. I'm not suggesting that it is bad RAM for you though, just an observation that some tests don't catch (as well) some errors as others.

If disabling the Logon Screensaver doesn't help, I'll disable SLI, pull one of the GFX cards, reinstall the graphics driver, and see what then.

Sounds good. I'd certainly kill the screen saver and try without SLI and without dual installed GPUs. I'd look into updating the NVIDIA drivers to their latest set as well since there are some pretty fresh ones out there.

Have you checked your 'power management' properties? There is a certain profile called 'High (Maximum) Performance' and if you want you can do an advanced edit of what that profile actually does in terms of Min CPU, Max CPU, Screen Saver, monitor power down, hard disc power down, etc. I'd pretty much set all the power management / screensaver things to OFF / maximum performance. You can probably turn off some of the ACPI power management things in your BIOS as well, though if you turn off too many Vista may fail to boot / complain.

Forgive the imprecise answers, I'll have to boot into Vista 64 later on and look at exactly what some of the options / registry keys / et.al. are called.

Try disabling your device drivers for ethernet, USB, sound, et. al. and see if that helps. Try changing the ethernet, USB, disk drivers back to Microsoft default drivers instead of the custom Nvidia ones. Get the latest chipset drivers for your chipset right from NVIDIA's site instead of Windows Update, sometimes WU can be out of date with respect to what it installs, or sometimes it just installs the wrong driver.


Enable full crash dumping and turn off auto-reboot on BSOD so you can see the BSOD and get a full crash dump file that you can check out in the debugger or submit to Microsoft.

Enable Data Execution Prevention = ON, NO EXCEPTIONS unless you have reason to have it use certain exceptions.

Turn off Plug And Play OS = YES (or try it ON if it was OFF) in the BIOS setup and hard reboot.

Does the crash happen if you switch off Aero? Go to a Windows Classic theme?

Actually -- thanks for the detailed suggestions, even if you don't think they're detailed!

The paradox here: The "system-builder" [me] wants to OC the system to find a 24/7/365 setting, evaluate cooling, test the RAM, etc., but . . . . this is a "new OS," and even for the "expert" and veteran with experience going back to DOS 2.0, it takes time to become familiar with features and reorganization.

For instance, the Display settings. With XP, you'd just right-click the desktop and "properties" and it would be at your fingertips. Easy to find the screen for "Screensaver" so you could change it to "None." I had "turned off" all the sleep/hibernation and other features under power-options, but was puzzled that I didn't find a "Display" icon in the control panel. Thus, another poster above had expressed briefly his contempt at my apparent ineptitude . . . I think he said "Wow! . . . oh, wow!" Now I remember -- that was bsobel, but I overlook that remark -- his assistance is also helpful here.

So far, I've un-installed the old May, 2008 nVidia Drivers and installed the new July 08 version -- from v.175 to v.177. And, of course, I think I saw somewhere in a properties screen the allocation of video and system memory, and I'm guessing that SLI complicates this.

Right now, I'm doing a "pinch-yourself" test to make sure I've successfully disabled the screensaver with the "None" setting. I'll be methodically drilling through your recommendations one at a time to resolve this.

The "idea" is to validate the memory as without "hardware flaw" and that it runs at the chosen settings -- which, in this instance, are default DDR=800, [4,4,4,12,2T] and the recommended voltage. As you may recall from my remarks above, I had the same problem with either the G.SKILL 2x2GB modules or the currently-socketed Corsair DHX's.

The MEMTEST86+ I'm using is the latest version, which recognizes the Wolfdale processor and the full complement of the 6MB L2 cache. Again -- no problem there -- with either RAM set, so it's certainly something else, and probably arising from the nexus of hardware and driver configuration with the OS.

And also -- why not stress-test the memory without the complications of AV program, screensaver, Aero and other things? Reluctantly, if I still have the same problem, we'll pull the second graphics card after disabling SLI and try one -- or for that matter -- one at a time.

Someone else had trouble with SLI and BSODs -- noting that they'd fixed it by changing the BIOS to ENABLE the gimmicky "SLI-Ready Memory" feature while setting "CPU OC%" to 0%. While this IS a gimmicky feature, and everyone suggests just disabling it, I'm sort of between a rock and a hard place for wanting to know precisely what those settings mean once it's "ENABLED." Maybe there's an update and explanation at some site like "RO-JAK's BIOS Guide."

But -- as always -- one thing at a time. . . . . Looking at my LCD monitor hooked up to the subject machine, it appears that I've FINALLY disabled the screensaver. Now -- to run either Blend Test or Everest's memory-stresser, and X my fingers while keeping tabs for 20 minutes and counting. [ . . . . and I still can't see how the problem just "disappears" with a 2GB memory kit, but emerges with a 4GB kit. But we've covered that -- generally -- per the interaction of SLI, PCI-E graphics generally, "shared memory," the drivers and other "complications."

I'll be back here to update my progress. There must be others who are similarly configured with dual-9600 GT's, VISTA-64 and 4GB RAM with a 680i chipset.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I'll EDIT this post --- rather than posting again -- to report updates on my progress.

UPDATE: [BACKGROUND REVIEW: The BSOD under PRIME95 Blend-Test occurred with the 2x2GB RAM at default DDR=800, [4,4,4,12,2T] and stock voltage, with the CPU OC'd from [E8400] 3.0 Ghz @ 3.6 Ghz. It occurred precisely after 20 minutes of "Blend-Test-ing" -- each and every time.]

CURRENTLY TESTING at CPU= 3.0 Ghz and the same RAM settings. INCONCLUSIVE BUT PROMISING RESULT: 35 minutes and counting -- rock-solid. TENTATIVE CONCLUSION: The problem is either the graphics driver version, the VISTA-64 screensaver feature, or both.

I'll let this go through an hour-and-a-half, reboot, reset to the 3.6 Ghz OC settings with the same RAM speed, timings and voltage, and then try again. I'll post those results here.

Whatever interaction between the OS hardware-layer, the drivers, the hardware itself, or the screensaver program -- Microsoft [EDIT: or nVidia . . . or Mersenne.org . . ] needs to heed this phenomenon and make some sort of update -- if indeed my tentative results prove final and conclusive. Stress-testing is "necessary" under any and all conditions -- with stock settings or OC settings.

SPECULATION: I only know that the use of XP and possibly VISTA-32 utilized some RAM above 3 to 3.5 GB. Perhaps that's an imprecise explanation, or only specific to VISTA -- whatever. It may be that the stress-test program may violate some memory addressing with the screensaver on or simultaneously utilizing that area. I'm just guessing . . . . otherwise, "Dunno."
MORE TO FOLLOW BELOW . . . .

* * * * * * *
UPDATE: 1 hour, 20 minutes and counting under stock settings. Time to unload PRIME95, re-boot, and pump up the CPU setting so this "tentative" conclusion becomes "conclusive."

YEEE-HAAAAHHH! I think I've got this licked!! This week, the pundits will say "On to Denver and on to November!" And I may be saying -- with my eye on the tube and convention news -- " . . . and on to 3.8 Ghz or higher!! . . . . "

 

[compman25]

You probably should have mentioned you were overclocking the cpu right from the start (even if it isn't the problem).

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Originally posted by: compman25
You probably should have mentioned you were overclocking the cpu right from the start (even if it isn't the problem).

I thought I did . . . . If you di-n't see it, maybe I di-n't!!

I went through another minor crisis, after another member sent me a PM saying his "BIOS was stuck" on his 780i card. He'd set it temporarily back to stock timings, and no matter what he did -- "Exit and Save" BIOS settings, it would come up again on "Auto."

I set the FSB back to 1333, leaving the RAM in "Native-mode" DDR=800 -- the test I showed stable above.

When I tried to reset to the 3.6 Ghz over-clock, I had the same problem. Re-flashing to the same BIOS version solved it.

But . . . . per the current test at 3.6 Ghz -- looks like I got another BSOD, but this time, after more than 30 minutes testing. I'd turned off the screensaver (FI-nally!) -- as mentioned above. And the RAM is still at 800 and the other settings from the earlier, successful test this morning.

This motherboard had once shown difficulties getting to an FSB of 1600 Mhz. This particular motherboard has hardly been used -- it's the twin of the one I'm currently running with a milder OC. But the small-FFTs tests -- some 9 hours and manually terminated with 0 err, 0 warns -- checked out. It may be the mobo; it may be the SLI-configuration. I'll now have to pull a graphics card and see if that eliminates it. But people had reported that the new Wolfdale processors suddenly made it possible on these boards to get to 1600 FSB -- at LEAST that.

OC'ing has risks -- we all know that. All I can say -- the mobo is certified for stock settings at 1,333 Mhz FSB. pushing that to 1,600 . . . . well . . . . I've seen plenty of 680i board capable of it. I'll need to do some more trouble-shooting. But it's not the RAM; it SEEMED to be the screensaver; it didn't happen with a 2GB RAM kit. Something else is going on here . . . . The PSU -- a 650W Seasonic -- should be quite capable of handling this combination of hardware.

E-VEN-tually, I'm going to sort this out. If it turns out to either be some piece of hardware or some particular hardware limitation . . . . . I'll put the system on the back burner and start saving my pennies to feed my hardware addiction. At least it's not like drugs -- where people STEAL to get their fix . . . . . I'll just save some more pennies and move on . . . .

EDIT: As much as SLI and "SLI_REady" memory may be more gimmick and hype than anything else, I recall some forum post or consumer-review I read in the last week where someone had complained about BSOD with SLI configuration -- possibly under an over-clock scenario -- and they'd resolved it by setting "SLI-Ready Memory [Enabled]" in BIOS and CPUOC 0%. What the hey. .. this is an experiment with VISTA 64 and spare hardware. I'll try what i can before reconsidering the options.

EDIT: Dropping the FSB back to 1550 and leaving the DDR @ 800 seems to make it stable again. (so . . . far. . . . ) I think I'm going to tweak the CPU_VTT voltage on this and/or the 1.2V_HT. All of those are set to "Auto" right now. You'd think, though, that these termination voltages -- if too low -- would only generate a failed and "stopped" PRIME95 "worker thread." Not a BSOD>


Anyway -- this is an OS forum, and I think I may be "bothering" you folks. Sorry about that.

 

[compman25]

Yeah, there was no mention of you overclocking til the post before my last one. I don't think your problem is a Vista 64 problem so much as it is a hardware problem.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Originally posted by: compman25
Yeah, there was no mention of you overclocking til the post before my last one. I don't think your problem is a Vista 64 problem so much as it is a hardware problem.

You're absolutely right, and I should've known better. There was a distraction to me of coming up to speed with a new MS OS. And once I'd finished last year's computer-build, I stopped doing further tweaking when I found the best settings.

The fact is, though, as old as I feel that I'm getting, I should have remembered what others had said about this motherboard: to get to the CPU_FSB or "external frequency" desired for the target over-clock speed, you need to increase the CPU_VTT termination voltage slightly as the board moves toward and past the 400 Mhz threshold. I had to do it anyway at a lower threshold around 350 Mhz. Yup!!

This was a good part of the problem, and my "OS installation and update" ordeal, coupled with a sense of being unfamiliar with VISTA, created a situation where I was pointing around the compass for problem sources like chicken-little instead of just using my head and remembering what I'd known about this motherboard before.

Fact is, this was supposed to be a "VISTA 64" familiarization project -- on a separate machine because I didn't want to face dual-boot complications on my trusted system with uncertainties about the successful installation of the new OS. I remember saying at the end of last year "I probably won't need to over-clock it."

But . . . . you see . . . . . when it comes to tweaking the hardware . . . . . . I have become an addict. And now . . . . I'm getting a new "fix" with this project. Maybe the analogy is more accurate than one would imagine in comparing with people habitually popping pain-killers: addicts are probably all masochists . . . . too . . . . 😀 :laugh: