Windows 10 performing poorly with powerful hardware.

[Eeglis]

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/15434952
Got a bit better scores this time.

[Nord]

39 minutes ago, belfouf said:

dude on each motherboard there are tested RAM you can buy (it's the 7th time I tell it today on LTT, Does No one knows ????????) , his is not

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/MAXIMUS_VII_RANGER/HelpDesk_QVL/

download  MAXIMUS_VII_RANGER_MEMORY_QVL  for testified working RAMS compatible with motherboard.

 

XMP loads certified RAMS config, and because it's not in the list..... don't use it

No offense but you need to express yourself better, else people just get confused.

 

First you said "RAM is not listed as tested and compliant with your MTB" - being tested is one thing and nobody ever will nor can test all the RAM available for a single motherboard, in every possible memory config, supported speed and with every supported CPU, thats a lifetime job - but not compliant means as much as incompatible and incompatible means its knowen to not work / cause issues. Which is not true at all.

 

After that you said you got the info from the RAM .pdf he provided and even linked it and then you get confused because people dont think of the Qualified Vendor List (QVL)? Just say: "I took a look at the QVL and its not listed there" ... like how complicated can you possible make it to tickle that one sentance out of you?

 

Also, - just making sure again here that I'm NOT disagreeing with the XMP profile argument - but you are wrong about that whole QVL thing. Firstly that list has not been updated since 2014/05/26 so that should give you a good idea of how "important" it is, further QVL list does not mean much unless you look at ECC memory. Its just a list of RAMs they did test on the motherboard which in no way or form means that other RAM's that arent listed cant work, also the RAM OP has are very close to one that have been tested.

Additionaly XMP is never "fail free", thats why its a overclock profile. Overclocks are cant be fail free in every possible case, thats why you have to overclock yourself. Even if his RAM would be listed on the QVL thats no guarantee that it will work with XMP and neither is it a argument that XMP wont work if the RAM arent on the QVL - anyhow, thats where JEDEC comes in, JEDEC works everywhere, 99% of the time and for his RAM the JEDEC is:

The SPDs are programmed to JEDEC standard latency DDR3-1600 timing of 11-11-11 at 1.5V .

So running at exactly this settings would eliminate all and possible problems with the RAM, especially as we know its stable from memtest64.

 

The bottom line is, QVL means nothing, thats why most people either dont think or even dont care about it.

http://www.gskill.us/forum/showthread.php?t=10566

 

 

But focusing on the problem at hand here again, all OP needs to do is to set his RAM to the above stated settings, boot up, see if the window stuff still happens, and if it does he can set it back again. Because if his RAM would be incompatible or XMP would cause problems, his benchmarks would be off or at the very least memtest64 would have found an error, which it did not.

 

[belfouf]

8 minutes ago, Nord said:

No offense but you need to express yourself better, else people just get confused.

 

First you said "RAM is not listed as tested and compliant with your MTB" - being tested is one thing and nobody ever will nor can test all the RAM available for a single motherboard, in every possible memory config, supported speed and with every supported CPU, thats a lifetime job - but not compliant means as much as incompatible and incompatible means its knowen to not work / cause issues. Which is not true at all.

 

After that you said you got the info from the RAM .pdf he provided and even linked it and then you get confused because people dont think of the Qualified Vendor List (QVL)? Just say: "I took a look at the QVL and its not listed there" ... like how complicated can you possible make it to tickle that one sentance out of you?

 

Also, - just making sure again here that I'm NOT disagreeing with the XMP profile argument - but you are wrong about that whole QVL thing. Firstly that list has not been updated since 2014/05/26 so that should give you a good idea of how "important" it is, further QVL list does not mean much unless you look at ECC memory. Its just a list of RAMs they did test on the motherboard which in no way or form means that other RAM's that arent listed cant work, also the RAM OP has are very close to one that have been tested.

Additionaly XMP is never "fail free", thats why its a overclock profile. Overclocks are cant be fail free in every possible case, thats why you have to overclock yourself. Even if his RAM would be listed on the QVL thats no guarantee that it will work with XMP and neither is it a argument that XMP wont work if the RAM arent on the QVL - anyhow, thats where JEDEC comes in, JEDEC works everywhere, 99% of the time and for his RAM the JEDEC is:

The SPDs are programmed to JEDEC standard latency DDR3-1600 timing of 11-11-11 at 1.5V .

So running at exactly this settings would eliminate all and possible problems with the RAM, especially as we know its stable from memtest64.

 

The bottom line is, QVL means nothing, thats why most people either dont think or even dont care about it.

http://www.gskill.us/forum/showthread.php?t=10566

 

 

But focusing on the problem at hand here again, all OP needs to do is to set his RAM to the above stated settings, boot up, see if the window stuff still happens, and if it does he can set it back again. Because if his RAM would be incompatible or XMP would cause problems, his benchmarks would be off or at the very least memtest64 would have found an error, which it did not.

 

I understand what you're saying no problem

 

on Qualified Vendor List they use to test XMP. if your module is on the list, you know you can use it. If it's not, you can't be sure and have to try. Yes indeed this list does not list the only RAM compatible (as you said.... lifetime job) but you know for sure those on it are.

 

glad you agree on the 11-11-11 at 1.5V since XMP as I understand it puts his ram at  9-9-9 at 1.65V

 

[Eeglis]

16 hours ago, Nord said:

No offense but you need to express yourself better, else people just get confused.

 

First you said "RAM is not listed as tested and compliant with your MTB" - being tested is one thing and nobody ever will nor can test all the RAM available for a single motherboard, in every possible memory config, supported speed and with every supported CPU, thats a lifetime job - but not compliant means as much as incompatible and incompatible means its knowen to not work / cause issues. Which is not true at all.

 

After that you said you got the info from the RAM .pdf he provided and even linked it and then you get confused because people dont think of the Qualified Vendor List (QVL)? Just say: "I took a look at the QVL and its not listed there" ... like how complicated can you possible make it to tickle that one sentance out of you?

 

Also, - just making sure again here that I'm NOT disagreeing with the XMP profile argument - but you are wrong about that whole QVL thing. Firstly that list has not been updated since 2014/05/26 so that should give you a good idea of how "important" it is, further QVL list does not mean much unless you look at ECC memory. Its just a list of RAMs they did test on the motherboard which in no way or form means that other RAM's that arent listed cant work, also the RAM OP has are very close to one that have been tested.

Additionaly XMP is never "fail free", thats why its a overclock profile. Overclocks are cant be fail free in every possible case, thats why you have to overclock yourself. Even if his RAM would be listed on the QVL thats no guarantee that it will work with XMP and neither is it a argument that XMP wont work if the RAM arent on the QVL - anyhow, thats where JEDEC comes in, JEDEC works everywhere, 99% of the time and for his RAM the JEDEC is:

The SPDs are programmed to JEDEC standard latency DDR3-1600 timing of 11-11-11 at 1.5V .

So running at exactly this settings would eliminate all and possible problems with the RAM, especially as we know its stable from memtest64.

 

The bottom line is, QVL means nothing, thats why most people either dont think or even dont care about it.

http://www.gskill.us/forum/showthread.php?t=10566

 

 

But focusing on the problem at hand here again, all OP needs to do is to set his RAM to the above stated settings, boot up, see if the window stuff still happens, and if it does he can set it back again. Because if his RAM would be incompatible or XMP would cause problems, his benchmarks would be off or at the very least memtest64 would have found an error, which it did not.

 

Ok, so far the problem is not in:
Windows
SSD
RAM
CPU

I'm suspecting that it might be HDD Dock or Sound Card, possibly GPU, unlikely though.
What I think is that Anniversary update included something what Essence STX II didn't like about. I'll monitor my situation without HDD dock first though.

[belfouf]

9 hours ago, Eeglis said:

Ok, so far the problem is not in:
Windows
SSD
RAM
CPU

I'm suspecting that it might be HDD Dock or Sound Card, possibly GPU, unlikely though.
What I think is that Anniversary update included something what Essence STX II didn't like about. I'll monitor my situation without HDD dock first though.

it means you changed your RAM timings/volatge as advised and it changed nothing ?

[Eeglis]

On 15.10.2016 at 8:43 PM, belfouf said:

it means you changed your RAM timings/volatge as advised and it changed nothing ?

Sorry about the late update, Windows Anniversary update broke Sound card's drivers, and as it happens my GPU had problems as well, I've RMA'd my GPU and got modded drivers for my sound cards and everything is in order.

[belfouf]

5 minutes ago, Eeglis said:

Sorry about the late update, Windows Anniversary update broke Sound card's drivers, and as it happens my GPU had problems as well, I've RMA'd my GPU and got modded drivers for my sound cards and everything is in order.

I'm glad for you