Frustrated with GA-8IK1100 performance....HELP!

Discussion in 'Gigabyte' started by Rich Heimlich, Apr 27, 2004.

  1. Guys,

    I've about had it with my choice in buying this motherboard. Either it
    stinks (which I don't think), is defective (possible) or I've goofed
    something.

    It has never felt any faster than my Athlon XP 1800+ system with 512k
    RAM and a Radeon 8500.

    I now have this board with a Radeon 9800 Pro and 1GB of Kingston RAM
    (I forgot the speed but it was fast when I ordered it 6 months ago,
    and was model KVM400 or something like that.) The processor is a
    retail P4 2.8GHz.

    Anyway, things have felt sluggish so I just ran 3DMark 2001 and 3DMark
    2003 and the results are horrible for this setup. They were 9478 and
    2048 respectively. Something is NOT right and I've been looking for
    months to find the issue.

    What could cause such poor performance? I should be seeing double
    those numbers at least, especially on the 2003 3DMark.

    I'm to a point where if I don't find the solution quickly, as in
    today, I'm going to buy a new Socket 478 motherboard and just move
    everything over to it.

    The only hardware of concern is the Kingston RAM as on the back of it
    there's a sticker referring to it as "Value RAM" which doesn't make me
    feel very confident about it. If anyone thinks this is the problem or
    possibly the problem and the actual model number would help, I'll go
    into the system to get it for verification.

    ANY help would be appreciated. At this point I'm just pulling my hair
    out. The BIOS seems to be set perfectly, XP has been re-installed
    several times with performance checked right after installs... Nothing
    is really cutting through this problem.
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 27, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Did you buy 2 sticks of 512 ddr/400 or just 1 stick of 1024ddr/400?
    This is a dual channel board. therefore for it to work at full speed (and it
    is fairly quick) it must have 2 sticks of ram to work at its full potential.
    also the sticks or ram have to be placed in the correct slots, please see
    your instruction booklet.

    Its not the fastest but is still up their with best IMHO.

    Also there is one option in the bios that is set as enabled as default, i
    cant exactly remember but its something to do with limiting timings for
    windows NT. you need to enable this if u are using XP.

    Hope this helps.

    Mark
     
    Mark and Tracy, Apr 27, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements


  3. OOOPSSS that should read disable not enable it. (see above) sorry
     
    Mark and Tracy, Apr 27, 2004
    #3
  4. Two sticks of 512. The receipt (I bought this from MWave who has this
    interesting service of shipping assembled and tested motherboards, RAM
    and CPU combinations) shows "Kingston KVR400X64C3AK3/1G 2X5".

    The RAM comes marked as "Kit of 2" meaning two pieces and each is in
    the Red/Orange slot, not the purple slots. I believe that puts the RAM
    in DDR1 and DDR4 slots.
    The rep told me that when we bought it. Sort of gave the impression
    that while it wasn't the absolute fastest, it wasn't far from it and
    was more stable than most. I read many problem posts of people trying
    to get other RAM to work with this board while mine has never been a
    stability problem.
    Er, that says, "Enabled" and "Enabled". If you find the specific item,
    that would help. I'll dig.
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 27, 2004
    #4
  5. Rich Heimlich

    MTech Guest

    Been there done that. Had a soyo dragon+(amd) system that for some reason,
    using good components, I could never get a "fast" system. Never found the
    issue, but my daughter absolutlely LOVES it..LOL.
    I built a 8KNXP rev 2 using 2.8 processor and kingston ram PC3500. I went
    with a 9700pro because I just got a heck of a deal. The whole deal is
    clocked to 3.3mhz and my 3dmarks03 score is 5975 using the default test
    setup without any messing with the video card or fancy/smacy cooling.
    System runs all day long and I'm pleased as punch....so if your looking for
    a relatively cheap system to build.....

    If you have a bud close to you that you could swap ram with, that would at
    least eliminate one problem.

    Also, just to remind you, make sure that video card is working right. Have
    you used sandra and posted scores to compare? Try some test that is
    non-video biased like sandra and post the results.

    Don
     
    MTech, Apr 27, 2004
    #5
  6. Had a Soyo Dragon Ultra+ myself before this. Never had a problem with
    As I understand it, that board is essentially the same as my board
    except for better RAID features which I really won't use. If so, that
    concerns me a bit.
    I just got Sandra last night after years away. Just run it's
    benchmarks and see? Where should I post them?
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 27, 2004
    #6
  7. Guys,

    Bit of a surprising update.

    I also happen to have a Radeon 8500 here that the Radeon 9800 Pro
    replaced. Not sure what this tells me but the results are VERY
    interesting.

    I decided to try and eliminate the 9800 Pro as a problem by installing
    the 8500 and re-installing the drivers. I'm using the Omega drivers
    but once XP sees you have a different card it will force a re-install
    even though they're unified drivers.

    I did all that and the system is up.

    I then decided to run 3DMark 2001 as it's a DX8 benchark and the 8500
    doesn't do much with DX9 as I recall. So I run the benchmark.

    Recall that the 9800 Pro gave me a score around 9400 and clearly that
    was well low.

    Well, the 8500 is giving me a score of 10518.

    Does that pretty much point the finger at the video card?

    I'm also wondering about the power supply. It's an Antec True Blue 430
    watt supply. I had been a PC Power and Cooling fan forever but
    switched to this with the new system as it was handy.

    Thoughts? I'd hate to go about replacing the video card only to find
    it's the power supply.

    And, does this test of mine really even tell us anything?
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 27, 2004
    #7
  8. Rich Heimlich

    MTech Guest

    I think it speaks volumes.....I think you MAY have a video card problem.
    Don't know much about your board but you ARE using the external p/s cable
    that connects DIRECTLY to the card and you did leave the plastic piece in
    the front of the PROAGP slot, right? ( I think i have that right).

    Run the Sandra CPU multi media AND the memory Bandwidth test and I'll post
    mine as well. We can post them here.

    I think you have a video card problem.

    Don
     
    MTech, Apr 28, 2004
    #8
  9. Yep. In fact, it's funny. Today I was running around going, "Is the
    9800 an AGP Pro card? I don't think it is, and it doesn't have the
    connectors to even reach that area." hahaha It's amazing the amount of
    talking to yourself you do when this sort of thing happens. The little
    plastic piece is still there and, in fact, I tried to REMOVE the power
    from the card today to test the 8500 but couldn't get it out so I just
    left it hanging outside. As long as it isn't drawing power, it doesn't
    matter.
    Absolutely. You'll see the info shortly.
    Thanks for at least hearing me. I've posted this all over and very few
    people are even interested. Just for the sake of coverage I've now
    ordered a replacement power supply (top of the line PC Power and
    Cooling 600w supply, which is really the one I wanted to start with)
    and just ordered another motherboard, JUST IN CASE. The good news is,
    my father-in-law is looking to upgrade his system shortly so whatever
    I have extra, I'll just sell to him at a discount and consider my loss
    and insurance premium. <grin>

    Meanwhile the 9800, for some UNKNOWN reason, I actually bought the
    1-year plan to return it so it can go back. I may just buy a second
    one to be sure and then take this one back and have them apply the
    credit for the one I bought.

    The really funny thing is that this is already my second 9800 Pro. The
    first one had major problems from the start. Obvious video noise
    everywhere.
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 28, 2004
    #9
  10. If I got this right, here goes:

    CPU Mult-Media Benchmark

    Integer iSSE2 21364 it/s
    Floating-Point iSSE2 30348 it/s

    If I read this right those numbers are pretty much right where they
    should be for the processor.

    Memory Bandwidth Benchmark

    RAM Bandwidth Int Buffered iSSE2 : 4177MB/s
    RAM Bandwidth Float Buffered iSSE2 : 4177MB/s

    These look to be solid numbers too.

    So what's this telling you? For me it seems to say that the CPU and
    memory are not the issue.
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 28, 2004
    #10
  11. Well, I solved it, I think but I'm still really confused by what
    happened.

    Follow this.

    I've been running Omega drivers going back to my 8500. Then I got this
    machine and kept doing that. I then did the bit of installing the 8500
    to see what it could do in this system.

    I then noticed I had duplicate tabs in the Settings/Advanced section
    of the Display settings. Clearly I'd gone a little nuts installing so
    it was time to uninstall and get a fresh start.

    I went to Add/Remove Programs and selected Change/Remove on the ATI
    Display Drivers. Oddly it came up and showed both the Radeon 9800 Pro
    (and 9800 Pro Secondary) AND the 8500 there. Except for one major
    difference. Under the 8500 on the columns to the right it noted that
    this card was AGP and Primary. Under 9800 Pro it said, "N/A" under
    both of those for both 9800 lines.

    Now maybe that's just the way it is, but that got me thinking that the
    system wasn't using the AGP properly with these drivers. So then I
    figured, what the hell. Why not just install the stock ATI drivers and
    see what happens.

    I removed all the Omega drivers, installed the ATI drivers (blech, now
    I have no Direct3D tab with all the known settings) and rebooted.

    Everything looked the same and then I ran 3Dmark 2001. The intial
    screen is the pickup running down a road. With the 9800 it was always
    starting out around 95fps no matter what I did. Now it was at 204fps.
    Okay! So then I let it run. End result, 18,168.

    But now I have to figure out what the hell is killing the Omega
    drivers because I really want to be able to configure my setup that
    way.

    Meanwhile I have to see if I can cancel the order for the motherboard
    I just ordered!

    WHY are the Omega drivers failing?
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 28, 2004
    #11
  12. Rich Heimlich

    Dimitris Guest

    It might be a virus, thought it would hard for a virus do descriminate
    between 8500 and 9800.

    So the most possible cause is that AGP doesnt work correctly when you
    put Radeon 9800. If you havent have any crashes with 9800 plugged in
    then 99% it isnt a power problem.

    Run Dxdiag and check at the display tab that AGP acceleration is
    enabled. If not, remove all ATi drivers, reboot, install your
    motherboard chipset drivers and reboot. Then install ATi drivers,
    reboot and run dxdiag again and check. Also from the smartgart tab of
    ati check whether agp is on and at which speed.

    It might be the horrible case that this combination of motherboard and
    radeon9800 cant cooperate to AGP bus.
     
    Dimitris, Apr 28, 2004
    #12
  13. Grrr, not entirely out of the woods yet. 3DMark 2003 has me at 2048
    which is the same exact score I got before.....

    Perhaps it is power and when 3DMark pushed the card, the card just
    isn't getting the power to keep up?
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 28, 2004
    #13
  14. And now, 3DMark 2001 is back to its slow mode.... something is REALLY
    WRONG.
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 28, 2004
    #14
  15. Rich Heimlich

    Dimitris Guest

    And do not use omega drivers, they might have compatibility problems
    with your motherboard and radeon9800.
     
    Dimitris, Apr 28, 2004
    #15
  16. Rich Heimlich

    Morph Guest

    Rich,


    When in the BIOS, have you tried the Control and F1 buttons, to enter the
    performance settings. Page 37 in my manual.

    cheers

    Morph
     
    Morph, Apr 28, 2004
    #16
  17. It's there. It wasn't there two weeks ago so when I did get it going I
    That's my concern. The intermittent nature of this is leading me to
    think that's the issue. Plus Gigabyte has already moved on to a 2.0
    version of this motherboard and it's clear to me that this one had
    some issues.
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 28, 2004
    #17
  18. I use CTRL-F1 all the time, though using "Top Performance" locks up
    the system and this is the first motherboard I've had since the 386
    days that requires you to pull the battery to clear the CMOS.
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 28, 2004
    #18
  19. Rich Heimlich

    Dimitris Guest


    It is obvious that when you run 3dmark 2003 agp bus was disabled.
    Reenable agp bus using powerstrip(recommended from
    www.entechtaiwan.com) or dxdiag.
     
    Dimitris, Apr 28, 2004
    #19
  20. Every reboot it's being set off something. dxdiag shows it as set but
    powerstrip allows me to set it and then when I run 2003 I got 6100.
    Any reboot and I'm back a score around 2000.

    At least there's progress.
     
    Rich Heimlich, Apr 28, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.