[QUOTE=chalsall;423643]Define "very well". Very fast, or very stable?

Also please note that there are many Linux distributions which pre-date Win7 which could be brought into this testing.[/QUOTE]

Of curse, you are right. And well, it might be stable. But probably more due to the fact, that many drivers are missing and so some compatibility modes will be auto-set by the OS. So that would not be very diagnostic of my current situation, I am afraid.

Unless, of course, you plan on migrating to an ancient OS for good - which I am not. Because, e.g., I want to use my 2GB/s read performance PCIe 4x SSD, my superior gaming performance, etc. Which is why I bought this who thing in the first place.


EDIT: Have you ever wondered whether there is auto-correction software running in forum software? I am making more and more "typing" mistakes. "course" -> "curse" (could be Freudian, though), "whole" -> "who". Usually I am typing rather well.

[QUOTE=pegnose;423699]Unless, of course, you plan on migrating to an ancient OS for good - which I am not. Because, e.g., I want to use my 2GB/s read performance PCIe 4x SSD, my superior gaming performance, etc. Which is why I bought this who thing in the first place.[/QUOTE]

A modern Linux distribution (e.g. Ubuntu, Fedora et al for the consumer grade, Red Hat, CentOS et al for commercial grade) should let you get full performance from the hardware, even your graphics card(s) using the proprietary drivers.

If you _have_ to run Micro$oft software, run a virtual machine such as Oracle's VirtualBox.

But such set-ups tend not to work terribly well for hardcore "gamers", where every FPS matters. I personally don't ever play video games, so this wouldn't be a concern for me.

But if you really want to get to the bottom of this issue you and s1riker are having, trying a completely different OS would be well worth the effort, IMHO.

[QUOTE=chalsall;423775]A modern Linux distribution (e.g. Ubuntu, Fedora et al for the consumer grade, Red Hat, CentOS et al for commercial grade) should let you get full performance from the hardware, even your graphics card(s) using the proprietary drivers.

If you _have_ to run Micro$oft software, run a virtual machine such as Oracle's VirtualBox.

But such set-ups tend not to work terribly well for hardcore "gamers", where every FPS matters. I personally don't ever play video games, so this wouldn't be a concern for me.

But if you really want to get to the bottom of this issue you and s1riker are having, trying a completely different OS would be well worth the effort, IMHO.[/QUOTE]

From what I read, Linux and gaming performance is only possible with NVidia, and this means like 80-90% of what you can achieve under Windows. Gaming performance with AMD under Linux is simply not good (so far).

I also have read that various virtualization solutions are on the verge of getting direct access to the GPU, which means that they won't have any major restrictions on 3D graphics for much longer. This sounds very promising to me!

Yes, a different OS might be a final resort. However, you would have to know exactly *what is different*, if you want to learn anything of it.

[QUOTE=pegnose;423784]Yes, a different OS might be a final resort. However, you would have to know exactly *what is different*, if you want to learn anything of it.[/QUOTE]

Yes. But...

Iff you find that things are perfectly stable under a modern Linux, while unstable under a modern Windows (with all the associated hardware drivers engaged (edit: for clarity, all the hardware drivers for both OSs)), then it does at least suggest that it's the software, rather than the hardware, which is the issue.

Edit: It is /really/ easy to set up a "dual-boot" / "multi-boot" system, which lets you choose which (of many) OSs you want to run from and on a single primary boot drive. The advantage of this is you can try many different software configurations without changing any hardware.

[QUOTE=chalsall;423794]Yes. But...

Iff you find that things are perfectly stable under a modern Linux, while unstable under a modern Windows (with all the associated hardware drivers engaged (edit: for clarity, all the hardware drivers for both OSs)), then it does at least suggest that it's the software, rather than the hardware, which is the issue.[/QUOTE]

Currently, there are no Linux drivers out for the ASUS M. VIII Hero. I wonder if any Z170 related ones are.

[QUOTE=chalsall;423794]Edit: It is /really/ easy to set up a "dual-boot" / "multi-boot" system, which lets you choose which (of many) OSs you want to run from and on a single primary boot drive. The advantage of this is you can try many different software configurations without changing any hardware.[/QUOTE]

True. Did it for Ubuntu and CentOS.

[QUOTE=pegnose;423802]Currently, there are no Linux drivers out for the ASUS M. VIII Hero. I wonder if any Z170 related ones are.[/QUOTE]

Hmmm... Interesting...

I did some research on the boards you're talking about.

I, personally, would never run any "kit" which was not fully enabled for Linux, no matter how cool it looked. And further, proven to be able to run 24/7/365 at full load.

Perhaps in the "gaming" world "have you tried turning it off and on again" is acceptable....

[QUOTE=chalsall;423818]
I, personally, would never run any "kit" which was not fully enabled for Linux, no matter how cool it looked.[/QUOTE]

But it does, you have to give me that! :)

[QUOTE=chalsall;423818]And further, proven to be able to run 24/7/365 at full load.

Perhaps in the "gaming" world "have you tried turning it off and on again" is acceptable....[/QUOTE]

a) Well, the platform is new. So, 24/7/356 is a bit tricky here. And
b) The good thing is: I am not responsible for it being realible for other people.

At work I have a different standard, just like you.

Microcode Update 6Ah seems to have fixed the issue
 

Asus bios 1602 (microcode update 6Ah) for Z170-A fixed the 768k FFT issue. After 12 hours of work no error appeared. Before this bios patch, errors appeared at least after 2 hours of execution.
I noticed better system stability.

FYI ver 0x74 dated 5-Jan-2016 is the latest and has been available for a while now.

@Madpoo, @chalsall

Most humbly I wanted to inform you that I just ordered another PSU. Quite reliably I had hard locks after the raid array had rebuilt. And I observed drive startup issues during post as well. It's worth a try.

[QUOTE=pegnose;424034]Most humbly I wanted to inform you that I just ordered another PSU. Quite reliably I had hard locks after the raid array had rebuilt. And I observed drive startup issues during post as well. It's worth a try.[/QUOTE]

Excellent. I hope this works for you.

If it doesn't, I would again strongly suggest you try a modern Linux in a dual/multi boot configuration. Perhaps boot into Linux when you're heading to bed, and see if you see the same type of issues under similar loading situations.

Good luck! :smile:

[QUOTE=pegnose;424034]@Madpoo, @chalsall

Most humbly I wanted to inform you that I just ordered another PSU. Quite reliably I had hard locks after the raid array had rebuilt. And I observed drive startup issues during post as well. It's worth a try.[/QUOTE]

Incidentally I did as well. This one: [url]http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=220-G2-0750-XR[/url] was a shellshocker deal over at newegg yesterday and I have a friend who built a skylake system with it and is not having any freezing issues. Plus I needed a spare PSU, so I figured why not? I can then definitively eliminate the PSU as a possible culprit.

[QUOTE=s1riker;424057]Incidentally I did as well. This one: [url]http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=220-G2-0750-XR[/url] was a shellshocker deal over at newegg yesterday and I have a friend who built a skylake system with it and is not having any freezing issues. Plus I needed a spare PSU, so I figured why not? I can then definitively eliminate the PSU as a possible culprit.[/QUOTE]
Nice! It's the one I have in my 6700K system and it has been awesome so far. Awesome for a PSU of course means that you simply don't notice it. :smile: No noticeable noise, neither from the fan or otherwise (no buzzing or similar), and no freezing or other instabilities.

Sounds promising! My current setup on HCI memtest in the desktop version under Win10 (8 threads, 14/16 GB) even in the "friendly" low-priority mode won't survive the night. So if it isn't the PSU, it still is the RAM - as, too, many people told me, and I wouldn't believe it.

Google news showed this page this morning

[url]http://www.tomshardware.com/news/asrock-releases-bios-updates-to-fix-intel-skylake-bug,31063.html[/url]

[QUOTE=pegnose;424096]Sounds promising! My current setup on HCI memtest in the desktop version under Win10 (8 threads, 14/16 GB) even in the "friendly" low-priority mode won't survive the night. So if it isn't the PSU, it still is the RAM - as, too, many people told me, and I wouldn't believe it.[/QUOTE]

Try bumping VCCIO up to 1.0V that made my RAM stable even at XMP settings. 48 hours of HCI satisfied me that my RAM is solid.

Yet, still I got another hang this morning at idle. Almost 5 days exactly, the frequency of occurrence is so strange. Going to install new PSU tonight, will report back in about 5 days :)

Also, on a related note, Gigabyte sent me a beta bios with SpeedShift enabled. I'm debating whether I should apply that today, or wait to see how the PSU test pans out?

[QUOTE=s1riker;424162]Also, on a related note, Gigabyte sent me a beta bios with SpeedShift enabled. I'm debating whether I should apply that today, or wait to see how the PSU test pans out?[/QUOTE]

Entirely up to you, of course. But changing one variable at a time is advisable. Besides, since the BIOS is beta perhaps let others test it first.

[QUOTE=chalsall;424164]Entirely up to you, of course. But changing one variable at a time is advisable. Besides, since the BIOS is beta perhaps let others test it first.[/QUOTE]

Pretty much all their BIOSes are beta, shows how not ready they were for this Skylake launch :) I've been trying them all in the hopes they would fix this issue. The current one I'm running is a beta that has the Prime95 AVX fix. The one they sent me is that + SpeedShift enabled.

But I think you're right, I will hold out on applying it at least for a week to test the PSU in known conditions.

[QUOTE=s1riker;424162]Try bumping VCCIO up to 1.0V that made my RAM stable even at XMP settings. 48 hours of HCI satisfied me that my RAM is solid.

Yet, still I got another hang this morning at idle. Almost 5 days exactly, the frequency of occurrence is so strange. Going to install new PSU tonight, will report back in about 5 days :)

Also, on a related note, Gigabyte sent me a beta bios with SpeedShift enabled. I'm debating whether I should apply that today, or wait to see how the PSU test pans out?[/QUOTE]


VCCIO is already up. This is someting different. Have also ordered new Ram as some reported issues on the VIII Hero with Crucial Ballistix Sport. Will report.

I'd go with chalsalls advice. One thing at a time. You could go for the Bios first, though, although I doubt it will help. Gut feeling.

[QUOTE=pegnose;424186]VCCIO is already up. This is someting different. Have also ordered new Ram as some reported issues on the VIII Hero with Crucial Ballistix Sport. Will report.

I'd go with chalsalls advice. One thing at a time. You could go for the Bios first, though, although I doubt it will help. Gut feeling.[/QUOTE]

I have the same feeling, but it does change how C-States are handled by the processor, so you never know.

[QUOTE=pegnose;424186]I'd go with chalsalls advice. One thing at a time. You could go for the Bios first, though, although I doubt it will help. Gut feeling.[/QUOTE]

My advise was trying the new PSUs before the BIOS.

Please do try to keep up.

[QUOTE=chalsall;424188]My advise was trying the new PSUs before the BIOS.

Please do try to keep up.[/QUOTE]

No no, I got that right. I just modified it. If I don't believe in an explanation, I get rid of it first. Because otherwise it might be that I am just denying it - and thus never test it.

[QUOTE=pegnose;424195]No no, I got that right. I just modified it. If I don't believe in an explanation, I get rid of it first. Because otherwise it might be that I am just denying it - and thus never test it.[/QUOTE]

Wow! You are just so cool.

I just wet my pants in excitement.

[QUOTE=chalsall;424199]Wow! You are just so cool.

I just wet my pants in excitement.[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, chalsall, I currently tend to piss people off. I just shut up.

[QUOTE=pegnose;424200]I'm sorry, chalsall, I currently tend to piss people off. I just shut up.[/QUOTE]

No problem pegnose.

Push the envelope as far as you want.

I don't want to push anything. I am just lacking the right dosage sometimes. Really, I am sorry. Ok?

Birds of a feather flock together... :smile:

[QUOTE=pegnose;424204]I don't want to push anything. I am just lacking the right dosage sometimes. Really, I am sorry. Ok?[/QUOTE]

Please don't apologize pegnose.

We welcome questions, and uncertainty. It's a somewhat rare (but lovely) position to be in.

Disappointed that I didn't have HWInfo logging enabled when I had the hang this morning, so I have no data about what happened just prior :( .. anyone know how to automatically start logging when HWInfo starts up?

[QUOTE=pegnose;424200]I'm sorry, chalsall, I currently tend to piss people off. I just shut up.[/QUOTE]
Don't take sarcasm from chalsall [U]too[/U] seriously. :razz:

{Skylake stabilty} = {[I]The[/I] 768k Skylake Bug} + {non-system-specific stability issues (>99 other types)}

Signal/Noise ratio in this thread could be greatly reduced if these are split in separate threads. (I am not volunteering. To me, this thread is fine as is. To newcomers with problems, it is a honeypot to post into. To some well-known individuals, it is a fabulous excuse to troll the newcomers.)

[QUOTE=Batalov;424230]{Skylake stabilty} = {[I]The[/I] 768k Skylake Bug} + {non-system-specific stability issues (>99 other types)}

Signal/Noise ratio in this thread could be greatly reduced if these are split in separate threads. (I am not volunteering. To me, this thread is fine as is. To newcomers with problems, it is a honeypot to post into. To some well-known individuals, it is a fabulous excuse to troll the newcomers.)[/QUOTE]

That's probably my fault, I derailed it when trying to tease apart the various system crashes that were in the wild. I was trying to point out there was potentially another systemic issue besides the 768k bug given the number of people reporting it over at the Tom's hardware thread, but at this point, I believe the most likely explanation is that there were some quality control issues with some of the early Skylake-S chips as some are perfectly fine with their builds and others are struggling (to a great degree) to get long term stability like myself, even after changing nearly every component.

Anyhow, it seems to be just pegnose and I in here trying to get our systems stable, so it probably makes sense to start our own thread, I'll leave that up to you pegnose. We could also just continue the discussion over at Tom's, but the signal to noise ratio has gotten really bad over there.

People are following the discussion. There is interesting information. Please carry on! :smile:

[QUOTE=kladner;424247]People are following the discussion. There is interesting information. Please carry on! :smile:[/QUOTE]

That was my impression. I also thought: the 768k thing is over, we are in the after show party here. So I thought it didn't matter much. If I am wrong I am happy to leave the field. We can leave a link to the new thread, so hopefully, interested readers can follow us over. Maybe you mersenne people can give us your opinion?

Although I am not sure what good it will do. I came here by accident, like others. I think that I stayed here because of the valuable expertise of people dealing with CPU torture the whole day. What we achieve otherwise is what you can see over at toms: mostly turning in circles. Nothing against the people there, they are just greatly in need of help, just like me. But the fluctuation is high it seems, and without any experts we do not really know what we are talking about. ;)

Interesting thing, on-topic for a change:

Several news articles on the web claim (that this or that brand patched the 768k bug first and) that it actually is MC rev. 74 that does the trick. Does anybody have more insight into this?


EDIT: I know that 6a was already stable for many people, but maybe there is more to it.

[QUOTE=pegnose;424264]Interesting thing, on-topic for a change:

Several news articles on the web claim (that this or that brand patched the 768k bug first and) that it actually is MC rev. 74 that does the trick. Does anybody have more insight into this?


EDIT: I know that 6a was already stable for many people, but maybe there is more to it.[/QUOTE]

I have a feeling their earlier microcode patch, that they apparently had already worked on before any of this Prime95 / 768K FFT stuff came to light, was a happy coincidence. They had already done some microcode update that seemingly also corrected this issue.

But we don't know what exactly the bug was, and I'm sure when Intel rolled back to their previous microcode and saw the issue, they probably realized there was a little bit more to the fix than the "accidental" solution they already had. Or maybe they realized they could optimize things somewhat and do a proper fix.

That's all speculation on my part and we'd have to wait for the Intel errata to know for sure what's included.

EDIT: Here's where I'm looking for the latest errata for Skylake. Right now it's just a Sept 2015 edition.
[URL="http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-spec-update.pdf"]http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-spec-update.pdf[/URL]

I'm just assuming at some point they'll update it with the latest.

[QUOTE=kladner;424226]Don't take sarcasm from chalsall [U]too[/U] seriously. :razz:[/QUOTE]

Sorry guys... I try to be informative, eclectic, and funny. I often fail...

Please continue the discussion. It is I who should shut up.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;424322]I have a feeling their earlier microcode patch, that they apparently had already worked on before any of this Prime95 / 768K FFT stuff came to light, was a happy coincidence. They had already done some microcode update that seemingly also corrected this issue.

But we don't know what exactly the bug was, and I'm sure when Intel rolled back to their previous microcode and saw the issue, they probably realized there was a little bit more to the fix than the "accidental" solution they already had. Or maybe they realized they could optimize things somewhat and do a proper fix.

That's all speculation on my part and we'd have to wait for the Intel errata to know for sure what's included.

EDIT: Here's where I'm looking for the latest errata for Skylake. Right now it's just a Sept 2015 edition.
[URL]http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-spec-update.pdf[/URL]

I'm just assuming at some point they'll update it with the latest.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for shedding a bit more light on this!

[QUOTE=chalsall;424329]Sorry guys... I try to be informative, eclectic, and funny. I often fail...

Please continue the discussion. It is I who should shut up.[/QUOTE]

C'mon now. I really thing we should drink a beer together sometime. :)

[QUOTE=pegnose;424339]C'mon now. I really thing we should drink a beer together sometime. :)[/QUOTE]

I look forward to it. But, please, not here in Bim. Our beer is *terrible*; a bit like making love in a canoe.... :smile:

I can give you a tour of the more interesting German beers...

Reply from Intel; no details...
 

This [URL="https://communities.intel.com/message/370294#370294"]post appeared on the Intel forum with relation to this issue[/URL] on 2016.01.29:

"I work for Intel Customer Support and just wanted to let you know that Intel will be publishing the next specification update in February following an update to our publication process.

This specification update will include information on this issue. No other additional information for now."

This was in response to a customer complaining (on 2016.01.26) that their MB supplier (ASUS) appeared to not even be aware about the issue....

[QUOTE=chalsall;424890]This [URL="https://communities.intel.com/message/370294#370294"]post appeared on the Intel forum with relation to this issue[/URL] on 2016.01.29:

"I work for Intel Customer Support and just wanted to let you know that Intel will be publishing the next specification update in February following an update to our publication process.

This specification update will include information on this issue. No other additional information for now."

This was in response to a customer complaining (on 2016.01.26) that their MB supplier (ASUS) appeared to not even be aware about the issue....[/QUOTE]

Sigh... I guess not every MB manufacturer is as hip and cool. They just twiddle their thumbs and wait for the official Intel errata to even start anything.

It does give me food for thought when I buy my next home system... I'll have to remember the motherboard makers who were actually on top of this and paid close attention.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;424938]I'll have to remember the motherboard makers who were actually on top of this and paid close attention.[/QUOTE]
:tu: Same here. Looking for a mobo for about 2 months now (x99, 4 way PCIe x16 spaced at 2 slots is a must) and I was just cutting Asus from the list after making huge efforts to get a hand on their x99e-ws mobo. This is one more reason for me to stay away for now.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;424938]Sigh... I guess not every MB manufacturer is as hip and cool. They just twiddle their thumbs and wait for the official Intel errata to even start anything.

It does give me food for thought when I buy my next home system... I'll have to remember the motherboard makers who were actually on top of this and paid close attention.[/QUOTE]
I am disappointed in Asus. I have used, or recommended their boards for a long time. Both boxes in this house run on Asus boards.

Am I correct in thinking that Asrock was quick out of the gate on BIOS updates with the new micro-code? Maybe MSI?

[QUOTE=kladner;424955]I am disappointed in Asus. I have used, or recommended their boards for a long time. Both boxes in this house run on Asus boards.

Am I correct in thinking that Asrock was quick out of the gate on BIOS updates with the new micro-code? Maybe MSI?[/QUOTE]

Having around 5 ASRock rigs working here... none have really given me any trouble at any time.

Well... I got an ASUS board, and the recently released bios 1402 fixed the 768k thing. That was a week before I read that ASRock fixed it. I think they did a quick-fix but want to go public only after Intel releasing more info.

EDIT: It's the Z170 Hero, the MC is 6a.

ASUS Z170
 

I got an ASUS Z170 gamer motherboard with Skylake 6770k cpu. Haven't updated the BIOS since I got the machine back in November. I tried to reproduce the bug following exact steps a few times and couldn't do so. Maybe I got lucky or maybe the CPU already had the accidental fix from Intel. Either way I am not going to update the BIOS unless I see anything for risk of unsettling a perfectly functioning system.

[QUOTE=Scottyboy99;424972]I got an ASUS Z170 gamer motherboard with Skylake 6770k cpu. [/QUOTE]

Are they out, yet?

[url]https://geizhals.de/195421249[/url]

Yep, sorry I meant 6700k

[QUOTE=Scottyboy99;424974]Yep, sorry I meant 6700k[/QUOTE]

Actually I am very curious to see the Devil's Canyon of Skylake. There is a lot of room for performance with this chip.

Just wanted to give everyone an update on my situation. I'm now on day 9 of continuous uptime with the new EVGA G2 750 PSU. I should note though that I had HWInfo logging turned on for the 1st 7 days, and there's a possibility that was keeping the CPU from going into any deep sleep states. I turned it off at pegnose's suggestion that it was very unlikely to provide any useful info.

I'll report back in a week or so and let you know definitively if it was the PSU that did the trick. That would be highly surprising to me as my previous PSU (Seasonic G650) is supposed to be very good and Haswell (C6/C7) certified. But when I looked at the JohnnyGuru reviews of that PSU and the EVGA one I have now, the EVGA one does much better on ripple suppression and voltage regulation than the Seasonic one. Perhaps Skylake-S is just that much more sensitive to power delivery? I even tried an older Corsair RM750 PSU that was in my previous Sandy Bridge build and it exhibited the same idle hangs.

Anyhow, I don't want to get too hopeful yet, If I can go another week, then I'll declare victory.

Sometimes power supplies may be slightly damaged from electrical surges. I've seen it happen.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;425081]Sometimes power supplies may be slightly damaged from electrical surges. I've seen it happen.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough, but to have it only affect idle operation, and to have 2 PSU's exhibit the exact same behavior? Seems odd to me. I'm still not confident this will actually be the end of it. Next week can't come fast enough :)

For me it seems to have been the residual ram instability (finally discarded the Crucial modules and haven't seen a hard lock since) and Win10 FastBoot feature (knocking out my s/w raid 1 sync on startup).

[QUOTE=s1riker;425082]Fair enough, but to have it only affect idle operation, and to have 2 PSU's exhibit the exact same behavior? Seems odd to me. I'm still not confident this will actually be the end of it. Next week can't come fast enough :)[/QUOTE]

How good is your upstream UPS? Is it "online" or "offline"?

How good is your mains (read: electrical power) provider? To share, mine is absolute crap. They often go beyond the allowed voltage ranges allowed by the regulator, and sometimes even go out of the promised 50 Hz.

Depending on where you are, your PSU may be covering your provider's behind.

[QUOTE=chalsall;425113]How good is your upstream UPS? Is it "online" or "offline"?

How good is your mains (read: electrical power) provider? To share, mine is absolute crap. They often go beyond the allowed voltage ranges allowed by the regulator, and sometimes even go out of the promised 50 Hz.

Depending on where you are, your PSU may be covering your provider's behind.[/QUOTE]

I suppose that's a possibility. I don't have an UPS connected to this PC, just a good quality surge suppressor. I live in a newish house (10 years old) in Toronto, Canada, where electrical standards are quite good. I've been in this house for all of those 10 years and never had a problem like this with any of my previous builds, let alone any electricity problems at all. But you still could be right, perhaps this EVGA PSU is masking a tiny problem in the electrical distribution, delivering much stabler voltages that Skylake/Z170 depends on in those idle states to stay alive.

I'm on day 10 now of no hard locks.

[QUOTE=s1riker;424162]Try bumping VCCIO up to 1.0V that made my RAM stable even at XMP settings. 48 hours of HCI satisfied me that my RAM is solid.

Yet, still I got another hang this morning at idle. Almost 5 days exactly, the frequency of occurrence is so strange. Going to install new PSU tonight, will report back in about 5 days :)

Also, on a related note, Gigabyte sent me a beta bios with SpeedShift enabled. I'm debating whether I should apply that today, or wait to see how the PSU test pans out?[/QUOTE]

just searching for Gigabyte SpeedShift Bios support and found your post..
can share what motherboard (I would like Gaming 7 Z170)?
also beta bios versión build?
for example I see in gigabyte site latest for my MB is F7g and on this site [url]http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-latest-beta-bios.html[/url]
even F7K can be found..

also would be nice if you can share if SGX is enabled on this beta bioses..
can check with HWINFO for example to see if enabled..
thanks..

[QUOTE=s1riker;425198]I suppose that's a possibility. I don't have an UPS connected to this PC, just a good quality surge suppressor. I live in a newish house (10 years old) in Toronto, Canada, where electrical standards are quite good. I've been in this house for all of those 10 years and never had a problem like this with any of my previous builds, let alone any electricity problems at all. But you still could be right, perhaps this EVGA PSU is masking a tiny problem in the electrical distribution, delivering much stabler voltages that Skylake/Z170 depends on in those idle states to stay alive.

I'm on day 10 now of no hard locks.[/QUOTE]

I'm in Toronto and I've had two power supplies fry from a single power surge. Surge protectors and UPSes don't protect against everything.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;425214]Surge protectors and UPSes don't protect against everything.[/QUOTE]

Indeed. And "Online" UPSs are much better than "Offline" in conditioning power because they always convert the power from AC to DC and then back to AC. But they are much more expensive, and less efficient.

"Offline" UPSs try to condition the power as best they can, but extremely fast spikes can still pass through them.

Consumer grade surge protectors are, in my opinion, almost useless for extremely sensitive kit.

Latest post on the Intel forum thread...
 

So, I received this email with relation to the ongoing discussion over on the offical Intel forum:[quote]You should get your live support more informed about this, had to spend one hour just to convince them there was a known "bug" with skylake processors.

Are you planning on doing any changes to the manufacturing of these?[/quote]

But following the [URL="https://communities.intel.com/message/371384#371384"]link provided[/URL] results in "We are improving your Intel community experience. The community is undergoing maintenance. We are working to finish our updates as quickly as possible. Please check back soon to see the latest updates.

Seems some cages were indeed rattled at Intel. And the occupants weren't amused....

[QUOTE=oscarbg;425202]just searching for Gigabyte SpeedShift Bios support and found your post..
can share what motherboard (I would like Gaming 7 Z170)?
also beta bios versión build?
for example I see in gigabyte site latest for my MB is F7g and on this site [URL]http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/28441-gigabyte-latest-beta-bios.html[/URL]
even F7K can be found..

also would be nice if you can share if SGX is enabled on this beta bioses..
can check with HWINFO for example to see if enabled..
thanks..[/QUOTE]

I have the GA-Z170X-UD3. Gigabyte support sent me a custom build of the F5g BIOS that's available for this model. The build they sent me is not posted anywhere yet as far as I know. I haven't applied it yet to see if SpeedShift actually works or not because I'm doing some testing first of a new PSU first. I'll probably apply it in the next few days. As for SGX, a BIOS update cannot enable SGX on my CPU because from what I understand, it was physically disabled or altogether missing from the 1st stepping.

[QUOTE=chalsall;425263]So, I received this email with relation to the ongoing discussion over on the offical Intel forum:

But following the [URL="https://communities.intel.com/message/371384#371384"]link provided[/URL] results in "We are improving your Intel community experience. The community is undergoing maintenance. We are working to finish our updates as quickly as possible. Please check back soon to see the latest updates.

Seems some cages were indeed rattled at Intel. And the occupants weren't amused....[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I am too dumb to follow: you received an email from whom with what content addressing which bug? Something new?

[QUOTE=pegnose;425294]Sorry, I am too dumb to follow: you received an email from whom with what content addressing which bug? Something new?[/QUOTE]

I think the point is that someone criticized Intel on their official forum, regarding their Help Desk not being up on the Skylake bug. When chalsall went to look, the site was "down for maintenance." It would be fairly ironic if Intel's forum had to go offline, even in part, to do an upgrade. The implication is that the criticism and question really stung somebodies at Intel, and they shut something down until they get their stories together.

[QUOTE=pegnose;425294]Sorry, I am too dumb to follow: you received an email from whom with what content addressing which bug? Something new?[/QUOTE]
I read it like that: He subscribed to the intel forum, so he gets email notifications when someone posts, with the content of the post too. He got such email but when he tried to go to the forum, it was down. Now it is back online, and the message is there. Click on the link.

edit: doh! kladned was faster...

Thanks to both of you! :)

well my system locked up today while idle, after 11 days on the new PSU. I think HWInfo logging was keeping it from going truly idle, because it locked up about 4 days after I turned that logging off. So I now know definitely that it's not bad RAM, it's not a bad mobo, and it's not a bad PSU. I guess SSD swap is next.

[QUOTE=s1riker;425361]well my system locked up today while idle, after 11 days on the new PSU. I think HWInfo logging was keeping it from going truly idle, because it locked up about 4 days after I turned that logging off. So I now know definitely that it's not bad RAM, it's not a bad mobo, and it's not a bad PSU. I guess SSD swap is next.[/QUOTE]

Damn! :sad:

Perhaps next try the BIOS update given to you by your motherboard provider. Your SSD is almost without question not the issue.

It is interesting, as you note, that your CPU seems to "hard freeze" randomly when truly idle for several hundred hours.

[QUOTE=s1riker;425361]well my system locked up today while idle, after 11 days on the new PSU. I think HWInfo logging was keeping it from going truly idle, because it locked up about 4 days after I turned that logging off. So I now know definitely that it's not bad RAM, it's not a bad mobo, and it's not a bad PSU. I guess SSD swap is next.[/QUOTE]

What would Yoda say? Time to RMA your CPU it is.

[QUOTE=s1riker;425361]well my system locked up today while idle, after 11 days on the new PSU. I think HWInfo logging was keeping it from going truly idle, because it locked up about 4 days after I turned that logging off. So I now know definitely that it's not bad RAM, it's not a bad mobo, and it's not a bad PSU. I guess SSD swap is next.[/QUOTE]

What kind of power savings settings do you have setup in the BIOS? Anything that you might consider tweaking to keep it from going into deep sleep modes that Windows (or whatever OS) could be choking on when it wakes up?

I'm assuming you don't have it going into standby or hibernation, so I'm talking more about the other low power states available for messing with.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;425385]What kind of power savings settings do you have setup in the BIOS? Anything that you might consider tweaking to keep it from going into deep sleep modes that Windows (or whatever OS) could be choking on when it wakes up?

I'm assuming you don't have it going into standby or hibernation, so I'm talking more about the other low power states available for messing with.[/QUOTE]

Yes, hibernation and standby disabled. The only power saving things I've tried changing from the defaults is to disable C8 and disable LPM. I had not tried C6/C7 yet because I was waiting to see if this new PSU would work or not. C6/C7 are next I guess, but I'm growing rather weary of changing one setting and then waiting a week .. I might just RMA the CPU soon, because even if C6/C7 do fix the problem, I should not have to disable them. The bleeping thing should work at the default settings in the BIOS and it clearly doesn't.

But maybe you can test c-states before RMAing? Would add more data to our knowledge base over at toms.

I know this means another week for you. I can full understand if you don't feel like it.

[QUOTE=pegnose;425524]But maybe you can test c-states before RMAing? Would add more data to our knowledge base over at toms.

I know this means another week for you. I can full understand if you don't feel like it.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I'm trying that now, I'll let you know how it goes.

[QUOTE=chalsall;425364]Your SSD is almost without question not the issue.[/QUOTE]
What makes you say that? As I believe I've mentioned previously in this thread, I had a very similar issue with my MacBook Air, where the system froze once every 2-4 months. Always during idle or very light load. There was no warning, just a complete freeze (including the mouse pointer). There were never any errors logged. It took almost 2 years for the drive to fail (it started giving SMART errors). The machine has never crashed again after getting a new drive.

[QUOTE=Brunnis;425648]What makes you say that? ... The machine has never crashed again after getting a new drive.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps I was wrong. :smile: I was speaking from the spike power load perspective, where SSDs don't tend to spike (much). Possibly it doesn't involve power.

But, to be perfectly honest, all the various different reports of Skylake instability (or, in other cases, no issues) really makes me wonder what is really going on.

Regardless, it definitely informs me that I'm not going to deploy any such kit until the reported issue(s) are well understood.

Edit: "(it started giving SMART errors)"... This is an excellent point! Is anyone seeing weird Skylake freezes seeing SMART errors in your logs?

[QUOTE=Brunnis;425648]What makes you say that? As I believe I've mentioned previously in this thread, I had a very similar issue with my MacBook Air, where the system froze once every 2-4 months. Always during idle or very light load. There was no warning, just a complete freeze (including the mouse pointer). There were never any errors logged. It took almost 2 years for the drive to fail (it started giving SMART errors). The machine has never crashed again after getting a new drive.[/QUOTE]

It seemed unlikely to me as well, but I haven't ruled it out. After I finish testing C6/C7/C8 disabled, if I still have the will, I'll try the drive next.

[QUOTE=chalsall;425652]Perhaps I was wrong. :smile: I was speaking from the spike power load perspective, where SSDs don't tend to spike (much). Possibly it doesn't involve power.

But, to be perfectly honest, all the various different reports of Skylake instability (or, in other cases, no issues) really makes me wonder what is really going on.

Regardless, it definitely informs me that I'm not going to deploy any such kit until the reported issue(s) are well understood.

Edit: "(it started giving SMART errors)"... This is an excellent point! Is anyone seeing weird Skylake freezes seeing SMART errors in your logs?[/QUOTE]


Not that I know of, so far. I recently put together a list of solutions found over at toms. Besides the usual noise (mainboard/heat sink seated incorrectly, faulty display cable...) two main categories appeared:
a) Ram incompatibility (no explicit errors), usually with Crucial Ram (very often Crucial Ballistix Sport)
b) bad CPU batch showing problems with c-states: either resolved by RMA or by disabling c-states (sometimes also disabling EIST or slightly overclocking the BCLK to 100.10 or something MHz; don't know whether this fits in the image)
For what I know this clears up abput 90% of the 'variance', with the rest being individual problems, sometimes, but not always, due to self-assembled PCs.

[QUOTE=chalsall;425652]Perhaps I was wrong. :smile: I was speaking from the spike power load perspective, where SSDs don't tend to spike (much). Possibly it doesn't involve power.

But, to be perfectly honest, all the various different reports of Skylake instability (or, in other cases, no issues) really makes me wonder what is really going on.

Regardless, it definitely informs me that I'm not going to deploy any such kit until the reported issue(s) are well understood.

Edit: "(it started giving SMART errors)"... This is an excellent point! Is anyone seeing weird Skylake freezes seeing SMART errors in your logs?[/QUOTE]
Yep, I'm very happy that my 6700K system appears to be fully stable. Makes me feel privileged. :big grin:

Regarding the SSD issue, it's certainly not the first thing I would suspect, but having ruled out most of the other usual suspects I would probably investigate it before replacing the CPU. To be honest, I have never experienced that type of crash with any SATA drives. The SSD in the Mac Book Air was a PCI-E (Samsung) drive. Maybe that had something to do with it or maybe it was all just really bad luck.

If I was using an M.2 drive in my Skylake system and had these crashes, I would definitely try with a SATA drive instead. M.2 and PCI-E SSDs in general can probably be assumed to be less mature than SATA.

["Fun" fact regarding my MacBook Air issue: Apple refused any sort of goodwill regarding this issue. This happened last year and they wanted almost $1000 for a replacement 256GB SSD and another $150 for installing it. I obviously didn't fall for that. Eventually found a used drive on Ebay. I didn't expect any goodwill, but I didn't expect the drive to cost a grand. My respect for Apple from a customer service point of view is pretty much ruined. How can they possibly expect anyone to pay almost as much for a new drive as a new computer? Or do they expect their customers to just throw away their otherwise perfectly functioning computer and buy a new one from Apple? In this case they lost me as well as my company as customers.]

[QUOTE=Brunnis;425711]
Regarding the SSD issue, it's certainly not the first thing I would suspect, but having ruled out most of the other usual suspects I would probably investigate it before replacing the CPU. To be honest, I have never experienced that type of crash with any SATA drives. The SSD in the Mac Book Air was a PCI-E (Samsung) drive. Maybe that had something to do with it or maybe it was all just really bad luck.

If I was using an M.2 drive in my Skylake system and had these crashes, I would definitely try with a SATA drive instead. M.2 and PCI-E SSDs in general can probably be assumed to be less mature than SATA.[/QUOTE]

Interesting. I have Samsung SM951 M.2 PCIe AHCI 256 GB SSD. My Skylake machine is running fine now. However, on testing max power saving settings I found out that I am able to produce a hang of this system drive by enabling ASPM for the PCH side of the DMI Link (the PCH is where the SSD is attached to, I suspect). Drives will stop working while I still can move the mouse and the clock is still ticking. If I click on stuff that would eventually effect drive access, the HDD LED will light up constantly and my system will lock up for good. Of course, no events in the log because they can't be written any more. But this really only happens if these power saving options are enabled in the Bios. I suspect this is because my drive supports an extreme power saving state called L1.2, while in the Bios for the DMI Link I can only select L0 or L1. Either this, or my Win10 installation is to blame. Because if I install Win10 clean on a Sata SSD, the thing is gone.

[QUOTE=Brunnis;425711]
["Fun" fact regarding my MacBook Air issue: Apple refused any sort of goodwill regarding this issue. This happened last year and they wanted almost $1000 for a replacement 256GB SSD and another $150 for installing it. I obviously didn't fall for that. Eventually found a used drive on Ebay. I didn't expect any goodwill, but I didn't expect the drive to cost a grand. My respect for Apple from a customer service point of view is pretty much ruined. How can they possibly expect anyone to pay almost as much for a new drive as a new computer? Or do they expect their customers to just throw away their otherwise perfectly functioning computer and buy a new one from Apple? In this case they lost me as well as my company as customers.][/QUOTE]

This is shocking, to say the least.

[QUOTE=Brunnis;425711]Or do they expect their customers to just throw away their otherwise perfectly functioning computer and buy a new one from Apple?[/QUOTE]

Yes, they do.

[url]http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/02/intel-to-shut-down-renegade-skylake-overclocking-with-microcode-update/[/url]

[QUOTE=s1riker;425654]It seemed unlikely to me as well, but I haven't ruled it out. After I finish testing C6/C7/C8 disabled, if I still have the will, I'll try the drive next.[/QUOTE]

A bad drive can (and has) caused performance problems, due to some really horrible retry code, in the past.

The gist of it was that when trying to read a bad section of disc (or flash, I guess) the drive would enter a "retry of death" where it would try to re-read that sector over and over again for a ridiculous amount of time.

As far as I know this was a spinning platter problem, don't know if SSDs were ever affected, and it had to do with some drives that tried way too hard to retry which would generate interesting interrupt activity and could slow your system to a crawl (during which you could hear your drive reset repeatedly).

I'm trying to remember if this was related at all to the old click-of-death, but whatever... it was annoying and I think a firmware update or something helped.

As usual with things like this, my memory may be fuzzy on the edges, so don't believe everything (or anything) I say.

Summary, let's say a bad SSD was causing it to remap areas from time to time. I don't know if SAS/SATA does the same horrible stuff PATA drives did, but it may cause a slight burp/hiccup in responsiveness if that were the case.

Using the SSD tools for your drive that (hopefully) show the # of remaps or the SMART status in general may be good just to rule that out.

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;425762][URL]http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/02/intel-to-shut-down-renegade-skylake-overclocking-with-microcode-update/[/URL][/QUOTE]
Grrr...:rant:

@pegnose, please correct me if I'm wrong .. but over at the Tom's thread, it seems we're coming to the conclusion that several of the early Skylake-S CPUs were manufactured with a defect wherein they would randomly hang with C6/C7 enabled, and that Intel's QA was not good enough to catch it (or they let it slip because they couldn't get good yields). I've currently got C6/C7 disabled and all it well so far. I just want some confirmation before I sent this darn thing back. What an ordeal.

updated spec posted <https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-spec-update.html>

[QUOTE=s1riker;426648]@pegnose, please correct me if I'm wrong .. but over at the Tom's thread, it seems we're coming to the conclusion that several of the early Skylake-S CPUs were manufactured with a defect wherein they would randomly hang with C6/C7 enabled, and that Intel's QA was not good enough to catch it (or they let it slip because they couldn't get good yields). I've currently got C6/C7 disabled and all it well so far. I just want some confirmation before I sent this darn thing back. What an ordeal.[/QUOTE]

That is my impression. I dare not say whether it is actually a defect. I would call it "extensive quality variance" atm, to that extent that it freezes the system in certain extreme situations (like very low power during c-states or c-state transitions). I speak of "broken" over at toms, because this is easily understandable. I conclude this from data we collected and from the info that Solis3 got from the Intel rep. Currently we have no counter-evidence. I.e. everybody who returned their CPU benefited from that. If disabling c-states is the only thing that actaully helps you (how long have you tested? 2 weeks in your case should be minimum), i see no point in not doing so (RMA the CPU). Particularly as you are through with everything else. As usual, it is at your own risk. But without any fancy stuff in your chassis, like 3000+ MHz DDR4 e.g., your system should run out of the box (at default settings).

It took me a few days to go over this entire thread, and I understand that I am so late to the party, but boy am I happy to have found this.


I work on prepping media servers for projection & video. I recently started using the i7-6700 with the ASUS z170-ws. I made about 20 systems before I got my first freeze. I usually stress test new systems for about two full weeks before I let them go out in the wild.

So here's the setup:

intell skylake i7-6700
ASUS Z170-WS (BIOS ver. 0503)
32GB RAM Crucial
Avago-LSI 9260 Raid Controler
4x500GB Samsung 850 (Raid 10)
Seasonic 600W PSU
EVGA GTX970
Windows 8.1 Pro

So , the first time the machine froze, it drove me up the wall. I swapped everything in this setup out , at least once (in the case of the RAID card I also tried two different manufacturers, same as the graphic card) , I changed types of RAM, different configurations, one dimm at a time, changed the CPU out , did everything humanly possible, but it kept freezing about 40 hours into rendering video. (so you understand it was a looong process). I have isolated the issue happening in windows regardless of what software was running at the time it froze.

Eventually I gave up on the motherboard and CPU altogether, moved on to a Xeon based system and put it behind me. And then I found this thread...So I put a system with the bad components back together and run Prime95 . The first time it run I got a bunch of the rounding errors. I am not sure if i had run the test as it's supposed to be run . I think I tested the 14942209 exponent basked on Henk_NLs instruction on the intel forums.

However the second time I tried to run the test , it seems that only the 1st worker is running and the other 3 are waiting for work. Is that normal ? or should i be seeing all 4 working? I didn't see the errors happening again, so I am quite confused as to how repeatable this is. I am not at all familiar with the program, and I wish instructions on how to reproduce this were a little clearer: For example: If I do /Advanced/Test , exponent 14242209 per the instructions on the intel forum, only 1 worker is active. If I use /options/Torture Test and set the parameters per instructions on this forum (786K, 8 threads, 120minutes) , the workers look like they are about to start but eventually all stay in "No work to do at the present time. Waiting." status.

I know that the issue is the Skylake freezing issue, and I know that ASUS has not yet released anything to address it. I just want to be able to reproduce it so I can pressure asus for a solution.

Any help with recreating the error is greatly appreciated

Thanks

[QUOTE=pasco;427861] If I use /options/Torture Test and set the parameters per instructions on this forum (786K, 8 threads, 120minutes) , the workers look like they are about to start but eventually all stay in "No work to do at the present time. Waiting." status.[/QUOTE]

Did you type 786 or the proper 768?

Since you've read the entire thread, I assume you are using version 27.9.

Hi pasco,

there is no such thing as "the Skylake freezing issue" and it won't have todo with the Prime95 bug, because that is fixed via bios updates by now.

The nearest thing to a "Skylake freezing issue" is the problem of a few early high-end Skylake CPUs with low power states. But as you experience your hard lock during load, this is clearly not your issue.

As one of really many people with the same thing (ASUS mobo with Crucial RAM) I would blindly attest that this is "your" issue (RAM incompatibility). Test this hypothesis with HCI memtest desktop version under Windows:

- run 8 (# of your threads) instances in parallel
- assign ~3500 MB of RAM to each (i.e. >85% of your RAM in total; leave at least ~2 GB for Windows 10)
- let this run AT LEAST until you reach a coverage of 1000%

You'll likely end up reliably in hard locks during this. In case your hard locks are rare, 1500-2000% might be needed to reproduce it. I wasn't able to make it past ~600%.

Then you will get different RAM and live happily ever after. :)

Thank you both for quick answers.

I did use 786 which is the wrong number. :blush: :tu:
I was able to run the test as expected with 768, and now waiting on results

I will be memtesting pegnose's theory soon, and confirm if results point at it.

ASUS, btw, has not had an updated BIOS ver. to address the prime95 issue for this specific motherboard (z170-ws). Their support just sent me a beta 0504 version to test with, which I have not done yet. So this is also pending.

Thank you again for all the help

Some manufacturers initially just went back to an MC which wasn't affected by the bug. MC 39 in most cases, iirc. Others may correct me if I am wrong.

Ok, here's my latest finds. The updated ASUS z170-ws BIOS fixed the errors on Prime95. It did NOT fix "my" freezing issues.

I am now going to test the memory the way pegnose suggested, and I will post any results

Just a little heads-up: this might actually take a day. To bolster your motivation:

[url]http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/id-2830772/skylake-build-randomly-freezing-crashing/page-15.html#17455667[/url]

I did get 72 errors with MemTest at about 110%.
I was only able to get each instance to test 3000MB only so i opened 9 instances to get more than 75% of RAM being used.

I am on my way to buy some Corsair based on Qualified Vendors List by ASUS.

I will know if this is solved by monday

The errors sound more like actually broken RAM to me.

I did try 2 brand new 4x8GB configs that my vendor supplied me with, to initially test that failing system. All crucial. All failed.

I am now running ~70 hours PROBLEM-FREE on a set of Corsair Vengeance RAM.

Will let it run through the week, but it already has ran more than any time in the past. Pegnose , thank you!

Welcome. Glad that it helped!