mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Hardware

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-01-02, 19:56   #1
TObject
 
TObject's Avatar
 
Feb 2012

34·5 Posts
Question Memtest86+ shows no errors but computer crashes with Prime95

Taking advantage of low DDR3 prices I upgraded my computer memory from 6 to 24 GB. The computer never crashed before the upgrade, now running Prime95 it crashes about once in a week or two.

The puzzling part is that running Memtest86+ for nine plus passes (forty-six and a half hours) uncovers no errors. I realize that Prime95 puts a different kind of stress on the memory (and more stress overall on the system). But my question, how often in the real world does this happen – no errors with dedicated memory test, but memory still not good enough?

I run Windows 7. Here is what I get in the crash dump, it does not have to be NTFS_FILE_SYSTEM, the previous time it was something else:

Code:
*******************************************************************************
*                                                                             *
*                        Bugcheck Analysis                                    *
*                                                                             *
*******************************************************************************

NTFS_FILE_SYSTEM (24)
    If you see NtfsExceptionFilter on the stack then the 2nd and 3rd
    parameters are the exception record and context record. Do a .cxr
    on the 3rd parameter and then kb to obtain a more informative stack
    trace.
Arguments:
Arg1: 00000000001904fb
Arg2: fffff88003b45f48
Arg3: fffff88003b457a0
Arg4: fffff800036fa4f0

Debugging Details:
------------------


EXCEPTION_RECORD:  fffff88003b45f48 -- (.exr 0xfffff88003b45f48)
ExceptionAddress: fffff800036fa4f0 (nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+0x00000000000000c0)
   ExceptionCode: c0000005 (Access violation)
  ExceptionFlags: 00000000
NumberParameters: 2
   Parameter[0]: 0000000000000000
   Parameter[1]: ffffffffffffffff
Attempt to read from address ffffffffffffffff

CONTEXT:  fffff88003b457a0 -- (.cxr 0xfffff88003b457a0)
rax=fffffa8000e0ceb0 rbx=fffef2802a26c100 rcx=0000058000000000
rdx=0000000000000050 rsi=0000000000000004 rdi=000000000000000c
rip=fffff800036fa4f0 rsp=fffff88003b46180 rbp=fffffa8000e0e6b0
 r8=fffff80003907500  r9=fffffa8012c00000 r10=fffffa8012c01308
r11=fffff880009b2180 r12=fffff80003907500 r13=2aaaaaaaaaaaaaab
r14=fdffffffffffffff r15=0000058000000000
iopl=0         nv up ei pl nz na pe nc
cs=0010  ss=0018  ds=002b  es=002b  fs=0053  gs=002b             efl=00010202
nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+0xc0:
fffff800`036fa4f0 f00fba6b1000    lock bts dword ptr [rbx+10h],0 ds:002b:fffef280`2a26c110=????????
Resetting default scope

DEFAULT_BUCKET_ID:  WIN7_DRIVER_FAULT

PROCESS_NAME:  System

CURRENT_IRQL:  2

ERROR_CODE: (NTSTATUS) 0xc0000005 - The instruction at 0x%08lx referenced memory at 0x%08lx. The memory could not be %s.

EXCEPTION_CODE: (NTSTATUS) 0xc0000005 - The instruction at 0x%08lx referenced memory at 0x%08lx. The memory could not be %s.

EXCEPTION_PARAMETER1:  0000000000000000

EXCEPTION_PARAMETER2:  ffffffffffffffff

READ_ADDRESS:  ffffffffffffffff 

FOLLOWUP_IP: 
nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0
fffff800`036fa4f0 f00fba6b1000    lock bts dword ptr [rbx+10h],0

FAULTING_IP: 
nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0
fffff800`036fa4f0 f00fba6b1000    lock bts dword ptr [rbx+10h],0

BUGCHECK_STR:  0x24

LAST_CONTROL_TRANSFER:  from fffff800036f8caf to fffff800036fa4f0

STACK_TEXT:  
fffff880`03b46180 fffff800`036f8caf : fffffa80`12c012e8 00000000`00000079 fffffa80`00dfaeb0 00000000`00000079 : nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+0xc0
fffff880`03b461f0 fffff800`03694250 : fa801549`c82004c0 00000000`00000000 00000000`000000f2 00000000`00000000 : nt!MiRemoveAnyPage+0x24f
fffff880`03b46310 fffff800`0392ac0a : fffffa80`153bf010 fffffa80`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000005 : nt!MiPfPutPagesInTransition+0x7c7
fffff880`03b46480 fffff880`01a31c10 : fffffa80`00000004 00000000`00000100 fffffa80`1620b220 00000000`000007ff : nt!MmPrefetchPages+0xda
fffff880`03b464e0 fffff880`01afabf9 : fffffa80`154b19c0 fffff8a0`2d9ff7e0 fffff800`03872280 fffffa80`154e3501 : Ntfs!NtfsPerformPrefetch+0x11c
fffff880`03b46530 fffff880`01afe3d0 : fffffa80`154e35e0 fffffa80`1551a180 fffffa80`00000000 00000000`0f7f8000 : Ntfs!NtfsScanEntireBitmap+0x1e5
fffff880`03b46820 fffff880`01b10258 : fffffa80`154e35e0 fffffa80`1551a180 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : Ntfs!NtfsInitializeClusterAllocation+0x60
fffff880`03b46850 fffff880`01aab819 : 00000000`00000000 fffffa80`15289c10 00000000`00000001 00000000`00000000 : Ntfs!NtfsMountVolume+0x13c8
fffff880`03b46b90 fffff880`01a3299d : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 fffffa80`154e35e0 fffff800`036dc5d3 : Ntfs!NtfsCommonFileSystemControl+0x59
fffff880`03b46bd0 fffff800`036de641 : fffff800`03872200 fffff800`039c7500 fffffa80`12e68b00 00000000`00001001 : Ntfs!NtfsFspDispatch+0x2ad
fffff880`03b46cb0 fffff800`0396be5a : 00000000`000c0e08 fffffa80`12e68b50 00000000`00000080 fffffa80`12df9890 : nt!ExpWorkerThread+0x111
fffff880`03b46d40 fffff800`036c5d26 : fffff880`03986180 fffffa80`12e68b50 fffff880`039910c0 00000000`00000000 : nt!PspSystemThreadStartup+0x5a
fffff880`03b46d80 00000000`00000000 : fffff880`03b47000 fffff880`03b41000 fffff880`03b45cc0 00000000`00000000 : nt!KiStartSystemThread+0x16


SYMBOL_STACK_INDEX:  0

SYMBOL_NAME:  nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0

FOLLOWUP_NAME:  MachineOwner

MODULE_NAME: nt

DEBUG_FLR_IMAGE_TIMESTAMP:  503f82be

STACK_COMMAND:  .cxr 0xfffff88003b457a0 ; kb

IMAGE_NAME:  memory_corruption

FAILURE_BUCKET_ID:  X64_0x24_nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0

BUCKET_ID:  X64_0x24_nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0

Followup: MachineOwner
---------
I have read somewhere that these errors may be caused by dynamic page file. I set my page file to fixed size (same size as the memory), but that did not help.

The processor is not overclocked, the memory is running at advertised settings.

Thanks
TObject is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-03, 22:04   #2
TObject
 
TObject's Avatar
 
Feb 2012

34·5 Posts
Default

Just got another one (posting it here to demonstrate that it does not really look like the file system problem, but more like a memory issue of some kind):

Code:
*******************************************************************************
*                                                                             *
*                        Bugcheck Analysis                                    *
*                                                                             *
*******************************************************************************

MEMORY_MANAGEMENT (1a)
    # Any other values for parameter 1 must be individually examined.
Arguments:
Arg1: 0000000000008884, The subtype of the bugcheck.
Arg2: fffffa8000e086b0
Arg3: fffffa800bc36ee0
Arg4: 0000000000000502

Debugging Details:
------------------


BUGCHECK_STR:  0x1a_8884

DEFAULT_BUCKET_ID:  WIN7_DRIVER_FAULT

PROCESS_NAME:  svchost.exe

CURRENT_IRQL:  2

LAST_CONTROL_TRANSFER:  from fffff80003727826 to fffff80003682fc0

STACK_TEXT:  
fffff880`07b248b8 fffff800`03727826 : 00000000`0000001a 00000000`00008884 fffffa80`00e086b0 fffffa80`0bc36ee0 : nt!KeBugCheckEx
fffff880`07b248c0 fffff800`03787ce5 : fffffa80`23fa5738 fffffa80`23fa6000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000020 : nt!MiRelinkStandbyPage+0xc6
fffff880`07b24930 fffff800`03a90994 : fffffa80`23fa4000 fffff880`07b24ca0 fffff880`07b24a08 00000000`022cbd01 : nt!MmSetPfnListPriorities+0x175
fffff880`07b24980 fffff800`03af249a : 00000000`00000020 00000000`00000000 fffffa80`23fa4000 00000000`00000001 : nt!PfpPfnPrioRequest+0x84
fffff880`07b249d0 fffff800`03af6cda : 00000000`00000000 00000000`0000004f 00000000`00000000 00000000`0b398401 : nt!PfSetSuperfetchInformation+0x199
fffff880`07b24ab0 fffff800`03682253 : fffffa80`179a88b0 00000000`02e6fea0 00000000`02e6fea0 00000000`02e707f0 : nt!NtSetSystemInformation+0xc8d
fffff880`07b24c20 00000000`76e12a0a : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : nt!KiSystemServiceCopyEnd+0x13
00000000`022cbcc8 00000000`00000000 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : 0x76e12a0a


STACK_COMMAND:  kb

FOLLOWUP_IP: 
nt!MiRelinkStandbyPage+c6
fffff800`03727826 cc              int     3

SYMBOL_STACK_INDEX:  1

SYMBOL_NAME:  nt!MiRelinkStandbyPage+c6

FOLLOWUP_NAME:  MachineOwner

MODULE_NAME: nt

DEBUG_FLR_IMAGE_TIMESTAMP:  503f82be

IMAGE_NAME:  memory_corruption

FAILURE_BUCKET_ID:  X64_0x1a_8884_nt!MiRelinkStandbyPage+c6

BUCKET_ID:  X64_0x1a_8884_nt!MiRelinkStandbyPage+c6

Followup: MachineOwner
---------
TObject is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 04:15   #3
ig1
 
Oct 2012
Houston, TX

37 Posts
Default

Have you tried running a memory test again?

I personally prefer http://www.memtest86.com/ to the version you are using.

I really like the multi-threaded concurrent CPU memory tests as they seem to accelerate the process of locating flawed RAM and seem to be more difficult to pass.

I have run memory in the past for long periods of time(30-90 days) before failures, which are typically fatal manufacturing flaws that doomed the memory when it was made are finally uncovered.

You might try updating your motherboard BIOS as addressing more memory may have uncovered a bug in the firmware you are running.

My .03
ig1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-04, 19:23   #4
TObject
 
TObject's Avatar
 
Feb 2012

1100101012 Posts
Default

The motherboard BIOS is the latest non-beta version. I tried lowering DRAM frequency, but the computer locked up again anyway.

Code:
*******************************************************************************
*                                                                             *
*                        Bugcheck Analysis                                    *
*                                                                             *
*******************************************************************************

IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL (a)
An attempt was made to access a pageable (or completely invalid) address at an
interrupt request level (IRQL) that is too high.  This is usually
caused by drivers using improper addresses.
If a kernel debugger is available get the stack backtrace.
Arguments:
Arg1: 0000000000000010, memory referenced
Arg2: 0000000000000002, IRQL
Arg3: 0000000000000001, bitfield :
	bit 0 : value 0 = read operation, 1 = write operation
	bit 3 : value 0 = not an execute operation, 1 = execute operation (only on chips which support this level of status)
Arg4: fffff800036ef4f0, address which referenced memory

Debugging Details:
------------------


WRITE_ADDRESS:  0000000000000010 

CURRENT_IRQL:  2

FAULTING_IP: 
nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0
fffff800`036ef4f0 f00fba6b1000    lock bts dword ptr [rbx+10h],0

DEFAULT_BUCKET_ID:  WIN7_DRIVER_FAULT

BUGCHECK_STR:  0xA

PROCESS_NAME:  avp.exe

TRAP_FRAME:  fffff880098947a0 -- (.trap 0xfffff880098947a0)
NOTE: The trap frame does not contain all registers.
Some register values may be zeroed or incorrect.
rax=ffffffffffffffff rbx=0000000000000000 rcx=0000058000000000
rdx=0000000000000050 rsi=0000000000000000 rdi=0000000000000000
rip=fffff800036ef4f0 rsp=fffff88009894930 rbp=fffffa8000e716b0
 r8=fffff800038fc500  r9=fffffa8012c00000 r10=fffffa8012c01308
r11=fffff8000383ce80 r12=0000000000000000 r13=0000000000000000
r14=0000000000000000 r15=0000000000000000
iopl=0         nv up ei pl nz na pe nc
nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+0xc0:
fffff800`036ef4f0 f00fba6b1000    lock bts dword ptr [rbx+10h],0 ds:00000000`00000010=????????
Resetting default scope

LAST_CONTROL_TRANSFER:  from fffff800036c9569 to fffff800036c9fc0

STACK_TEXT:  
fffff880`09894658 fffff800`036c9569 : 00000000`0000000a 00000000`00000010 00000000`00000002 00000000`00000001 : nt!KeBugCheckEx
fffff880`09894660 fffff800`036c81e0 : fffffa80`00000002 fffff8a0`11c08630 0f0f0f0f`0f0f0f0f 00000000`00000000 : nt!KiBugCheckDispatch+0x69
fffff880`098947a0 fffff800`036ef4f0 : fffffa80`174d9b30 fffffa80`1a3fab50 00000000`044d0000 fffff800`036f1dc6 : nt!KiPageFault+0x260
fffff880`09894930 fffff800`036edcaf : fffffa80`12c012e8 00000000`00000079 fffffa80`00eb96b0 00000000`00000079 : nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+0xc0
fffff880`098949a0 fffff800`036d7414 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000002 00000000`00000000 ffffffff`ffffffff : nt!MiRemoveAnyPage+0x24f
fffff880`09894ac0 fffff800`036c80ee : 00000000`00000001 00000000`044ddc80 00000000`7e66d001 00000000`00000000 : nt!MmAccessFault+0x1224
fffff880`09894c20 00000000`6f310cc3 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : nt!KiPageFault+0x16e
00000000`094bed9c 00000000`00000000 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : 0x6f310cc3


STACK_COMMAND:  kb

FOLLOWUP_IP: 
nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0
fffff800`036ef4f0 f00fba6b1000    lock bts dword ptr [rbx+10h],0

SYMBOL_STACK_INDEX:  3

SYMBOL_NAME:  nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0

FOLLOWUP_NAME:  MachineOwner

MODULE_NAME: nt

DEBUG_FLR_IMAGE_TIMESTAMP:  503f82be

IMAGE_NAME:  memory_corruption

FAILURE_BUCKET_ID:  X64_0xA_nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0

BUCKET_ID:  X64_0xA_nt!MiReplenishPageSlist+c0

Followup: MachineOwner
---------
The kind of a good thing is that it seems to lock up daily now, so I should be able to diagnose it quicker. Thank you for the 'non-plus' memtest86 recommendation. I am going to try it next.
TObject is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-05, 18:57   #5
tServo
 
tServo's Avatar
 
"Marv"
May 2009
near the Tannhäuser Gate

2×3×7×19 Posts
Default

Do you still have the old memory? If so, put that back in & if the errors disappear, you have nailed it.
tServo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-01-07, 19:05   #6
TObject
 
TObject's Avatar
 
Feb 2012

34·5 Posts
Default

I tried running Memtest86 (without plus) v4.0a for three full iterations of test sets – no errors.

Then I left the computer on Prime95 Torture Test for two days – no errors, no crashes.

Before that, it was crashing on my regular assignments. Maybe there is something in my assignments that makes the computer crash. To see if a pattern emerges I will experiment with different assignments for a few days before starting to swap memory sticks.

I still have the old memory. And I even got a spare stick of new memory.
TObject is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-24, 00:44   #7
skan
 
skan's Avatar
 
Apr 2012

2×47 Posts
Default

It can be many things, QPI frequency or voltage, drivers, windows errors...

Last fiddled with by skan on 2013-03-24 at 00:46
skan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-03-24, 02:32   #8
TObject
 
TObject's Avatar
 
Feb 2012

34×5 Posts
Default

It could have been something in the BIOS memory mapping. Turns out the motherboard does not officially support 24 GB of memory, even though the processor does.

I thought it did not matter anymore, since the memory controller is inside the processor; well maybe not.

I downgraded the commuter back to 6 GB.
TObject is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-08, 11:29   #9
Manpowre
 
"Svein Johansen"
May 2013
Norway

3·67 Posts
Default heat ?

I have a amd 8150 8core processor, and with Prime95 one core crashes the computer for some reason.

I do think it can be due to overheating on the core as I used dry cooling paste and it might not have been taken all out when I attached the H100 water radiator cooler set.

Mem86 came out just fine after 2-3h to run. Its not only Prime95 that crashes the computer, also FaH crashes computer. so since Prime95 is only cpu dependent, its for sure the CPU.

I need to get a test program for the CPU, any suggestions ?
Manpowre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-08, 11:33   #10
Manpowre
 
"Svein Johansen"
May 2013
Norway

3·67 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=Manpowre;339659]I have a amd 8150 8core processor, and with Prime95 one core crashes the computer for some reason.

I just got an idea, could the memory overheat too, where one core not being able to adress the memory at some point ?

I will try to run Prime95 again tonight overnight by turning on the chassis fan to high and use high setting for my water cooler so things should consume heat the best way..

I have 16gb mem.. 64bit Windows 7.
Manpowre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-09, 06:01   #11
Karl M Johnson
 
Karl M Johnson's Avatar
 
Mar 2010

3·137 Posts
Default

You can easily monitor the temperatures with HWMon on Win.
As for the cause, it may be unstable overclocking (you did not buy H100 just to look fancy, didn't you?).
Modern RAM modules usually come with heatsinks, so I doubt it has anything to do with that.

So, check the temperatures(CPU cores and the others) before crashing.
If they're fine, maybe you need to raise the voltage up a bit on the CPU.
If it's overclocked, then downclock 'till it's stable.

Last fiddled with by Karl M Johnson on 2013-05-09 at 06:04
Karl M Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Computer crashes robert44444uk Hardware 8 2017-01-19 11:18
Small FFTs immediately crashes my computer, help please! scrawlings Information & Answers 39 2014-08-02 21:48
Everything crashes my computer Unregistered Hardware 6 2004-08-09 19:28
Mystery Computer Crashes... Jeff Gilchrist Hardware 7 2004-06-29 13:44
prime95 and memtest86 headache Hardware 4 2004-06-02 19:53

All times are UTC. The time now is 09:23.


Fri Aug 12 09:23:29 UTC 2022 up 36 days, 4:10, 2 users, load averages: 1.33, 1.33, 1.30

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔