• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

ASUS M5A97 EVO AM3+

gezz I can wait to get an mobo with UEFI those shots are just porno after years of shitty old bios screens
 
Does not like all Corsair RAM

Got the EVO board and it is absolutely fantabulous! Except that it is pickier with RAM than I expected. I got two CMX4GX3M1A1600C7 and the board just does not like them. After clearing CMOS I can manage to get into the BIOS and the SPD data is read correctly. After saving the default settings the restart hangs with a memory error. The DRAM LED is on and pressing the MemOK button doesn't do anything (so much for MemOK).
The modules are back to the store (damn restocking fees) and next try will be the G.SKILL F3-12800CL9D-8GBRL combo. The specs of that are not as great as for the Corsair, but it is cheaper and it is on the list of tested modules. Keeping my fingers crossed that it works.

In case that I run into problems again, any good advice on what to set the RAM options to so that the system runs stable? My goal is to get it working reliably first and install an OS. I can always break things later, hehe.

Running this board with a Phenom II X4 945 and a Zotac 9800GT. Should be a really nice mid level system. Looking forward to what it can do.
 
Sounds like maybe some bad sticks. I've noticed the same odd behavior with another user of the exact same ram, actually. Turns out the sticks were bad for him, hopefully you ran into hte smae problem, and there isn't some other weird issue...It's also worth noting that some older ram, like those sticks, just doesn't play well with AMD.
 
OK, finally got the G.Skill memory that is on the approved memory list. Installed it...and get the same results. After clearing CMOS the system boots up and I can get into BIOS, but after saving BIOS settings or any other means of reset the board hangs with a memory error.
I turned off ECC mode and also lowered the frequency from 1600 to 1333, but nothing helps. Again, pressing the MemOK switch doesn't do anything to help either.

Any suggestion will be greatly appreciated.
 
what CPU are you using?(nvrmind, read your other post agian) maybe just try setting memory voltage and primary timings manually. you might need to up CPU_NB volts a bit too.
 
Checked the timings and they are exactly as the module specs state, same for the voltage. I'll try inching up the CPU_NB volts a bit.
So much for approved memory, MemOK, and SPD. This is supposed to work right out of the box. *sigh*
 
Got some more interesting observations. When I turn the main switch on the PSU off (same as pulling the mains cable out), wait a minute, then turn everything back on, the system boots without problem.
Could that be a PSU issue? I use a brand new Antec Neo Eco 520C.
 
Most likely it is... when you first start your PC everything is running at full noise until it's been checked by the POST maybe it's putting your PSU into an overdraw situation and making the Volts a bit wonky causing mem errors
 
While I still think it is an option, it isn't because of the PSU being too weak. If anything, it is oversized. Interestingly, after installing W7 and performing several reboots it appears to work fine....probably jinxed it now.
Thanks for all your help.
 
And I bought M5A97 PRO... can't run quad-core stable - Windows boots, but any stability testing (Prime, Orthos, OCCT) fails instantly. Tri-core is OK (both cores 1/2/3 and 1/2/4), but quad is no go.
I'm considering flashing PRO with newer BIOS for vanilla M5A97.
 
What exactly is the issue?

I did find a workaround for my problem. When I turn off the PSU completely (has a switch, unplugging the power cable would do the same), wait a minute, then try again, I get the system to boot without problem. Well, sort of, the BIOS screen appears claiming that overclocking failed, but I run the default settings and didn't overclock anything. That requires opening up the BIOS screen, but when leaving immediately, the whole box boots up fine and is not only rock solid, but also blazingly fast.
My plan is to never turn the system off and instead use sleep mode, which works out fine so far. The system comes back to life within a few seconds.

As far as I can tell, the memory check routine in BIOS has a flaw and MemOK is useless in this case. I did read in other forums (G.Skill, Asus) that many other people have the same problem. Given that the board is rather new to the market I expect this to come up more often in the future.
I sent out two support requests to Asus, which did not get answered within the promised 48 hours and the escalation to high priority appears to be useless. In the past Asus support was rather good, so not sure what happened. I'll give it another week before I write to the CEO. The support department is obviously dysfunctional, so there is no point in dealing with them any longer.

So except for this rather annoying flaw the board is really nice and I am happy with it.
 
phobosq said:
And I bought M5A97 PRO... can't run quad-core stable - Windows boots, but any stability testing (Prime, Orthos, OCCT) fails instantly. Tri-core is OK (both cores 1/2/3 and 1/2/4), but quad is no go.
I'm considering flashing PRO with newer BIOS for vanilla M5A97.
Click to expand...

Wait. You bought Athlon X3, and unlocked the 4th disabled core?
Then I think that 4th core is really crippled and its not caused by mobo
But I can be wrong
 
I'd have to agree with blue.dot personally why didn't you just shell out the wee bit extra for an proper X4 if you wanted stability DUH!!!
 
it's possible a BIOS update is needed for unlocking. I don't have any chips that need unlocking to test with.
 
blue.dot said:
Wait. You bought Athlon X3, and unlocked the 4th disabled core?
Then I think that 4th core is really crippled and its not caused by mobo
But I can be wrong
Click to expand...

I have Phenom II X2 which used to run for two years as X4 rock stable.
 
phobosq said:
I have Phenom II X2 which used to run for two years as X4 rock stable.
Click to expand...

the only thing that proves is it's the luck of the draw as some of the PII x2 were good x4's with 2 cores disabled... That certainly doesn't mean that every chip with an disabled core will be good when unlocked if a core is to borked than no amount of tweaking is ever going to get it to run stable
 
that 'll make it an Phenom II x4 920 then
 
Replied to ya. ;)

Also keep in mind that if you want direct help, Erocker has a teamspeak server set up, just send me a PM or something, and I can hop in and help ya out with anything.
 
USB 3.0 drive performance failed to put the M5A97 EVO on top, most likely due to it employing the Asmedia USB 3.0 controllers, much different from the NEC/Renesas and Etron products on the other boards. The complete result almost seems to show a bandwidth
limitation when we tested using the ports on the rear I/O, so we repeated our tests using the front panel header, and we received the exact same numbers. We are not too sure why the ASUS M5A97 PRO seems to come up short here
Click to expand...
TechPowerUp

Last, but certainly not least is the new ASMedia ASM1042, a USB 3.0 host controller that offers much better performance than the widely-used NEC/Renesas D720200F1 chip that is found on most motherboards.
Click to expand...
Hardware Zone

ASMedia ASM1051 USB 3.0 controller shows actual 10x increase over USB 2.0
ASMedia ASM1051 USB 3.0 controller shows actual 10x increase over USB 2.0 During our testing of various USB 3.0 devices so far, we've seen roughly 3 - 4 times performance improvements over USB 2.0. The results we've seen have not been as impressive as first expected by all the 10x performance gains by everyone who makes any sort of USB 3.0 product. The ASMedia ASM1051 controller chip achieved just over a 10x performance improvement with the Crucial SSD compared to the same setup with USB 2.0. This is the first time we've seen a product able to meet the claims of a 10x boost for USB 3.0 and we think it is exciting to see and we think it is also a good sign of things to come in the future.
Click to expand...
(Tweaktown)

Hardware Zone suggests the ASMedia controller - note, ASM1042 - is superior to NEC but they haven't, as yet, tested the performance of the M5A97 EVO. Tweaktown, however, mentions the ASMedia ASM1051 controller, which appears to be a later version. Apart from a driver issue this may explain the slower USB 3.0 performance in TecPowerUp's review of the M5A97 (ASM1042), though they don't say what drive(s) they were testing in the back and front USB ports and whether it/they were the same for all the boards they compare.
Rev 1.0 releases are usually always improved, e.g. the very good GigaByte AM3 8+2 Phase GA-870A-UD3 which had three v2.0 revs and two version 3.0s, i.e. five upgrades after the initial rev 1.0. Who would want the first (which, incidentally, is still being sold where I am)? :rolleyes:
 
cyba said:
Apart from a driver issue this may explain the slower USB 3.0 performance in TecPowerUp's review of the M5A97 (ASM1042), though they don't say what drive(s) they were testing in the back and front USB ports and whether it/they were the same for all the boards they compare.
Click to expand...

The drive's model and type for all interfaces are listed in the Test System configuration table. I use the same hardware for testing all boards, minus CPU(as AMD boards cannot use Intel CPUs, etc). The one thing that changes is ram, but all ram I have( 6 kits) is tested in each board looking for compatibility issues.

Here on the top of page 8 is the test system config:

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/M5A97_EVO/8.html


Are you telling me they have updated the USB3.0 controller in this ASUS board?

You post makes no real sense to me, otherwise.


Also, Tweaktown advertizes 10X USB3.0 vs USB 2.0, but that is only really going to happen if you are using an SSD in a USB 3.0 enclosure, or a drive that offers 10x performance than what USB2.0 allows. You'll never find me making marketing statements like that. MY USB3.0 native drive is NOT 10x faster on USB3.0 over USB2.0, unfortunately!:laugh: USB 3.0 for the drive only offers 2x performance, yet performance suffered.




Yes, it could have been a driver issue that gave lower numbers, as I had these boards, and was testing them, long before they were in retail, and long before any other reviewer had them. Many many times issues I have during test pre-release boards, like the G1Sniper2 I'm working on now, and the MSi board I finished with last week, are fixed before launch. part of what I do is report the issues I encounter to the OEMs in hopes they fix things when the actual product has been sent to stores.

I has an issue with the MSi board...all boards are now shipping with an updated BIOS that I didn't ahve access to when testing. I had to redo some testing once I got the BIOS.

Gigabyte board I have now didn't come with all teh pqackage accessories, maknig my reivew partially incomplete. There is also a very big issue that is already known about, and will be fixed with a BIOS...after my review of it goes live.

Because of problems like this, things liek BIOS version and all the parts used for testing, are listed in my reviews.
 
Last edited:
Guys new BIOS is avaible! BD is comming!
 
Yes, and it solved my core unlock stability issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top