tincanalley

Personally, I would turn off MCE. Doing so allowed me to hit 5.1 and be stable. So far I've been using the machine for video encoding, and other tasks and not one BSoD or other issue. With MCE on, it crapped out doing simple benchmarks and other stress tests. Not saying this will solve your issues, or get you higher speeds, but it isn't a helpful feature when manually OCing.

I'm currently restoring this machine. It has had 3 lives so far. It started out as a Zeos 486 33 ISA, then to a Zeos 486 DX100 ISA/VLB and then to a Supermicro socket 7 Overdrive Pentium 200MHz w/MXX ISA/PCI. It is the last one that is being restored. The previous boards are in storage and this build allows me to play many games up to around the Quake era. 1.44 floppy, 1.2 floppy, Kenwood TrueX 72, 2GB SCSI Barracuda Drive (x2), Pentium Overdrive 200MHz, 64MB EDO 60ns ram, Hayes ISA smart modem, Sound Blaster Awe64 ISA PNP, Matrox Millennium PCI, Intel 10/100 Ethernet PCI and Adaptec 2940w SCSI adapter. It is still running on the original Lite-On 300w AT power supply from 1992. I have lots of other old equipment. I'll have to scrounge up some pics of those. Have an IBM PS/2 50Z w/MicroMaster 386 board, etc. Fun stuff. Also tons of adapters I've kept over the years.

The issue is if the replacement battery connection also expects to recharge the battery, I would have to use an NIMH replacement as lithium batteries require a different means of recharging. My understanding is the charge has to be closely monitored and this board wouldn't know that. Could be in bigger trouble than a leaky battery if it overcharges. Now if it doesn't try to recharge the external, an standard lithium would work. I guess I'm just going to solder a direct replacement as the MB manual mentions nothing about it and SM doesn't support anything over 15 years old and doesn't keep any files or other stuff on hand even if they wanted to help.

I dragged out my old machine from '95 to clean it up and make it my DOS and W98 gaming machine. During the disassembling process to clean it and streamline the components I noticed the CMOS battery was leaking. It is a 3.6V NIMH and soldered to the board. I ordered a replacement, but then noticed near the battery is a 4 pin external battery connection. I determined only pin 1 and 4 are used, but that's all I could find out. I didn't find a way to switch to that connection, nor if it also has to be a rechargeable NIMH. So, here's my question... Do I need to desolder the old battery to use the external connection? Does the battery connected to the pins need to be a rechargeable or can I use a lithium battery? Oh, on a side question... The board has a USB 1.0 header that's only 8 pins. From what I can find, the pinouts are the same as USB 2.0, so I think a normal rear panel USB designed for 2.0 should work. Just not sure if I can get W98SE to use it. Any thoughts? It's not really a huge issue as it won't be needed for gaming. Just thought it would be good to move files to and from the machine. Just in case someone knows the board, it is a Supermicro P5STE. Back in the day it was a pretty nice motherboard.

It's killing me having to wait as well. I almost purchased the Asus Rog RTX 2080, but held off once I heard about the Super version. If they give the same kind of performance gains the 2070 Super has over the original 2070, I think it will be well worth the wait and cost the same.

I would wait. If the Super model isn't worth it, you'll still be able to get a 2080 for a decent price as they will want to offload that model and lower the price to do so.

Guess I'm the oldest respondent. 52 this year and been playing games since the introduction of the Magnavox Odyssey back in 72. Nothing like taping overlays on your TV for each game. How many other old-timers remember the first version of Doom with opengl that could be played in a window under NT 3.1? Or network play using IPX? We had many visits from the network guy with his sniffer. Not a serious gamer, now, but I still play when time permits.

Asus has their versions up on their site, less pricing, and they have the 2070 Super noted as having two 8 pins. So I'm assuming the 2080 Super will have the same.

Looks like the 2070 Super has two 8 pin connectors, so the 2080 Super that I am waiting for will also have two 8 pins. Guess I know I can now order to custom 8 pins.

That would be nice to have a twin wire to an 8 pin (for both PCIe and motherboard supply).

So then if the PSU manufacturers can use an 8 pin that can go beyond what an 8 pin on the PCIe side can handle, then the PCIe side needs to use something similar to make things easier and more efficient. Less cabling and cleaner look.

So the PSU makers can pump more than the standard amount of power through their connector and the cable, but the receiving end has to adhere to the standards? Not really a huge deal, but the darn cable looks ugly. I'm hoping the RTX 2080 Super will have a single 8 pin and then I'll get a custom cable for it. Until then, I'm using this ugly one. Thanks for the info

I'm attaching a couple of pics. This is a Corsair RM1000i and if you look at the PSU pic, you will see a single 6+2 cable in the upper left. That is the GPU power. Now the second is the GPU. See how the single cable splits into 2 for powering both ports. So power limitations set for an 8 pin are being ignored?

I don't think anyone is understanding. The cable comes off the PSU from an 8 pin port and divides it up into an 8 and a 6 at the other end, so in reality, the card is getting both power ports supplied by a single 8 port from the PSU.

I have a question about the additional power required by most of the GPUs. For instance, my older GTX 760 has one 8 port and one 6 port. Both of those are required to power the card (or so the manual and specs claim), obviously, but here's what I don't truly understand. Take the PSU connection, most have a single cable with two connectors on it. Usually two 6 pins and two 2 pins so you can use either 6 or 8 or a combination of the two. So this cable is splitting the same power lines coming from the PSU to supply those two ports. Since this is happening, why bother having 2 connectors on the card? Why not just have one 8 since there is no difference in what you're getting from the supply side? Even if you used two cables, if you have a single rail PSU, you would still be pulling from the same rail. I'm hoping I'm missing something no too simple, but it is quite possible I am.

Cool, I'll give it a shot. Didn't think about the board using the CPU as well. Good to know.

So I should back up the raid and switch? Doesn't software raid add overhead?

Pretty new to the use of Raid and have a question about verifying and rebuilding. I have two 4TB WD drives in Raid 1 on and Asus Maximus XI Extreme. All was well with this setup for a couple of weeks, then the other day, out of nowhere, the Intel icon said it was verifying and there was disk activity for over 3 hours before it finished. Is this normal and something that happens often? I check the drives with WD diagnostics and there were no issues with either drive. Also, today I had them disconnected while I rearranged their mounting and I forgot to plug one in when I restarted the system into BIOS. I shut down once I noticed one was missing, plugged it back in and then restarted. This time I have disk activity and the Intel RST is saying it is rebuilding the array. So just from on boot into bios with one raid drive unplugged it decided it needed to rebuild when I plugged the second one in? Thanks for any and all info and advice.

Okay, I still have work to do, but I'm almost done. I need the new video card and horizontal mount to arrive and then I can get some custom extensions for the cables and tidy it even more. Then I'm going to cover up the upper portion of the case with another strip of wood that will hide all the cables on the top and coming out of the power supply. From there I need to mount the SSD on the back wall and fashion a bracket for the VRM fan as well. With a few tweaks here and there, I should be done soon. Someone opened the door on the cabinet and you should have seen their face when they were presented with a computer. Not what they expected and when everything is buttoned up, it just looks like a wall cabinet. Anyone know of a 90 degree adapter for the power/reset/HDD led connection?

I have been using OCCT versions 5.1.0., 5.1.1 and 5.2.1 and paid for the annual usage license. I put the file they sent me into the program directory and I no longer get the reminder and 10 second wait, which is nice. But one thing I can't figure out is where the reports are. It says a report will be generate at the end of the tests, but I never get any. There is nothing in the setup of the program pertaining to reports and there are no files generated and saved, let alone displayed. I tried to get online help, but I guess there isn't any. Thanks

So I am trying to flat mount 3 WD 3.5" drives to a wooden surface. They need to be close together to fit in the space I have, so I am limited in the type of bracket or mount. So here's my issue. I have found that the trays meant to hold a 2.5 inside it or a 3.5 on top of it would be perfect, but they are designed so the drive mounts on top an if I mount the drive, I can't attached it to the wood while the drive is mounted on the tray. If I mount the try, I can't mount the drive to it as I won't have access to the bottom where the screws attach. So that is out of the running. The others are the U shaped ones that adapt the 3.5 to fit in a 5.25 bay, but hose bracket are way to big and I have no way of cutting them down. So what I need is basically a 4" long L style bracket. Ones that screw to the side of the drive and then would allow me to screw the other part of the bracket to the wood. Only issue is, I've only seen these as part of an expensive mounting kit. I'm not going to spend 60 bucks on three kits only to toss 90% of it. Any ideas? As you can see from the attached images, there are brackets, but each one has it's issue. Either cost or modifying. The best one is the image with the samsung ssd. Those L brackets would be perfect, but I can't find just those.

I really liked my 2011v3 socket for this very reason. With the integrated bracket, there was no way to have a loose bracket.

This is my second 9900K. The first one wouldn't clock above 4.9 and remain stable and there were a couple of cores that ran much hotter than others. This second one is clocked at 5.1 and stable and all the cores are pretty equal in temps. As a whole, this second one runs cooler than the first. I'm guessing the TIM is better on this current one.

It is pulled down tight. I know what you mean about the back plate being loose. I was worried about that when I first put it together, so I dry fitted it to see and it made contact fully and was able to snug it down.

Okay, I'm currently using a Corsair H115i Pro on my overclocked 9900K (5.1GHz, no AVX offset, 4.9Ghz cache and 1.295V). My temps idle around 34-36c and have gone as high as 95c during stress tests. Now I would like to get the max temp lower, so I've been thinking of building a custom loop. However, I have some questions as to whether this is necessary as I'm not sure my current cooling is deficient and if it is, what part of it is. For instance, while I can't keep my max temp down below 90c during stress testing, the coolant temp never goes above 40c. So if after an hour or so of stress testing, the coolant is only about 5 to 6c above where it started. This makes me think the capacity of the AIO is enough, but I'm thinking it's the plate on the block that's the issue. I don't think it is pulling heat away from the processor as fast or efficiently as possible. So if that's the case, then a custom loop with a better water block would be called for, but not a larger radiator or higher pressure/speed fans.