Xeon Owners Club

[Magic Cube]

Finally update with me and my Fujitsu Celsius R940. I have now enabled platform aka IntelRCSetup Menu aka Admin menu(Fujitsu), Added NVME driver(finds my NVME drive on bios/UEFI) and added Kuri0's Rebar driver also. Don't know if rebar works as computer has Geforce 1030. 1030 has no support for Rebar.

First I managed to disable Intel Flash Descriptor from Bios, Management engine flash descriptor and Lan adapter flash descriptor. I had to use this UEFI bootable USB-drive https://github.com/DavidS95/Smokeless_UMAF to get all bios settings which had affect to Flash Descriptor. I did hex editing for disabling all of those pesky flash descriptor protections and after that flashing file via Intel's system tools. After that I used https://github.com/BoringBoredom/UEFI-Editor for enabling hidden Fujitsu admin/Intel RCsetup-menu. I just had to unsuppress and give rights to all options. After that I use UefiTool 0.28. For adding drivers for NVME and Rebar, UEFITool 0.28 worked fine, as newer one's don't have replace option. Just select last file from tree which has setup and AMITSE-files. Select Insert after...

One thing I didn't do is All Core Turbo Mod. I have been thinking that, but still something in my brain is stoping me. As my Fujitsu computer is dual processor system. I don't know if I can cool all cores of 2696V3(18 cores) on All Core Turbo.

But this I just my experience.

 

[Sora]

no Rebar on Pascal, can't even force it with the fork

 

[budget_Optiplex]

I posted in the 'latest tech purchase' thread about my latest cheap Xeon upgrade: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/whats-your-latest-tech-purchase.225885/post-5162210

One very interesting thing I have discovered in setting this system up and running diagnostic software to make sure everything is working correctly, is a difference in behavior between 'new' and 'old' versions of CPU-Z concerning my Xeon E5-1650 V4 CPU. The 'new' version of CPU-Z (I tried several including the latest 2.08) only reports a maximum turbo multiplier of 38, when this particular CPU can turbo to 40 with 1-2 cores (verified it is doing this with HWiINFO64) yet an older version of CPU-Z reports the turbo multiplier correctly at 40. I wonder why the newer versions of CPU-Z are doing this, as it would seem it could cause some uncertainty as to whether the BIOS is configuring the CPU correctly as I first thought before discovering this behavior. Anyways, just a note on my findings in case it helps anybody out!

 

[Sora]

I posted in the 'latest tech purchase' thread about my latest cheap Xeon upgrade: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/whats-your-latest-tech-purchase.225885/post-5162210

One very interesting thing I have discovered in setting this system up and running diagnostic software to make sure everything is working correctly, is a difference in behavior between 'new' and 'old' versions of CPU-Z concerning my Xeon E5-1650 V4 CPU. The 'new' version of CPU-Z (I tried several including the latest 2.08) only reports a maximum turbo multiplier of 38, when this particular CPU can turbo to 40 with 1-2 cores (verified it is doing this with HWiINFO64) yet an older version of CPU-Z reports the turbo multiplier correctly at 40. I wonder why the newer versions of CPU-Z are doing this, as it would seem it could cause some uncertainty as to whether the BIOS is configuring the CPU correctly as I first thought before discovering this behavior. Anyways, just a note on my findings in case it helps anybody out!

You have disabled C-States, Speedstep or have C6/7 demotion disabled, which effectively makes this a 3.8Ghz processor and disables the last turbo steps.

This field in the version that has full support of the processor is detecting the max ratio from the 0x1AD MSR_TURBO_RATIO_LIMITS

 

[budget_Optiplex]

You have disabled C-States, Speedstep or have C6/7 demotion disabled, which effectively makes this a 3.8Ghz processor and disables the last turbo steps.

This field in the version that has full support of the processor is detecting the max ratio from the 0x1AD MSR_TURBO_RATIO_LIMITS

Interesting, but doesn't explain why both CPUID HWMonitor and HWiINFO64 show 1-2 cores occasionally turboing to 4.0GHz under single threaded loads like they should be? I have experimented with the limited C-states in this Lenovo BIOS and so far nothing seems to change the behavior of CPU-Z only showing 38 while the monitoring utilities show occasional 4.0GHz turbo speeds. The benchmark for single thread in CPU-Z also typically reports anywhere from 490-500, which I suspect wouldn't be that high if there was no 4.0GHz turbo, especially when I look at comparable CPUs in the CPU-Z validator database (such as this one:https://valid.x86.fr/2jvibe). This is strange no doubt! I'll check and see if there are any C6/7 settings though, thanks!

 

[Sora]

Seems to be a Broadwell/Haswell - E quirk, the turbo 3.0 multi's are not reported via the register.

CPU-Z showing incorrect multiplier range

www.overclock.net

 

[Edwired]

Anyone have experiences with ASRock extreme 5 or 6 with 128gb and xeon e5-26xx (Can't make out the marking at the end of the IHS) seen it in a local ads it kinda in a range of the budget I'm hoping to get. Just need to know the pros and cons with this.

 

[bobbybluz]

Anyone have experiences with ASRock extreme 5 or 6 with 128gb and xeon e5-26xx (Can't make out the marking at the end of the IHS) seen it in a local ads it kinda in a range of the budget I'm hoping to get. Just need to know the pros and cons with this.

I have an Extreme4/3.1 with an E5-2699 v4 in it and 128GB of RAM. It works great. It'll also take up to 256GB of RAM and supports ECC memory. ASRock X99 mobos are the best for Xeons and large amounts of RAM in my experiences. ASRock > X99 Extreme4/3.1

 

[Edwired]

I have an Extreme4/3.1 with an E5-2699 v4 in it and 128GB of RAM. It works great. It'll also take up to 256GB of RAM and supports ECC memory. ASRock X99 mobos are the best for Xeons and large amounts of RAM in my experiences. ASRock > X99 Extreme4/3.1

Yeah had another look at the ads it ASRock extreme 6 x79 series board seems good just have to look at the layout and what it looks like sometime soon

 

[Toothless]

Yeah had another look at the ads it ASRock extreme 6 x79 series board seems good just have to look at the layout and what it looks like sometime soon

He was talking about x99. x79 maxed at 64GB.

ASRock > X79 Extreme6

Premium Gold Caps (2.5 x longer life time), 100% Japan made high quality conductive polymer capacitors; Intel Core™ i7 processor family for the LGA 2011 Socket; Supports Quad Channel DDR3 2400+(OC), 8 DIMM slots, Max. capacity up to 64GB; Digi Power Design, 12 + 2 Power Phase Design; 3 PCIe 3.0...

www.asrock.com

 

[Edwired]

He was talking about x99. x79 maxed at 64GB.

ASRock > X79 Extreme6

Premium Gold Caps (2.5 x longer life time), 100% Japan made high quality conductive polymer capacitors; Intel Core™ i7 processor family for the LGA 2011 Socket; Supports Quad Channel DDR3 2400+(OC), 8 DIMM slots, Max. capacity up to 64GB; Digi Power Design, 12 + 2 Power Phase Design; 3 PCIe 3.0...

www.asrock.com

Well I had a look at the ad it with 128gb ecc ram not sure what brand is it as he didn't take a picture of it so don't know why you say it 64gb max when the seller said it

 

[Toothless]

Well I had a look at the ad it with 128gb ecc ram not sure what brand is it as he didn't take a picture of it so don't know why you say it 64gb max when the seller said it

Probably because my screenshot and link is literally from AsRock's product page? Official support is 64GB and who knows if the guy is lying or not.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Official support is 64GB and who knows if the guy is lying or not.

It could very well be possible. Remember X58 and it's supposed 24GB limit which then turned into 48GB with the advent of 8GB DIMMs? So maybe 128GB is possible with the right DIMMs and the right config.

EDIT: Just looked it up, if a board has 8 DIMM slots and 16GB DIMMs were used, there's the 128GB. 16GB DIMMs do exist, and right now they're seriously inexpensive..
Example;

16GB HP Hynix 712383-081 708641-B21 HMT42GR7AFR4C-RD PC3-14900R DDR3 1866 LOT for sale online | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for 16GB HP Hynix 712383-081 708641-B21 HMT42GR7AFR4C-RD PC3-14900R DDR3 1866 LOT at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

EDIT2:
With the Xeon range for X79, the RAM limits are between 384GB and 768GB. So at least in the specs 128GB should be doable. For reference, here's the specs for my 2667V2.

Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2667 v2 (25M Cache, 3.30 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2667 v2 (25M Cache, 3.30 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

ark.intel.com

Here's the V1 specs.

Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2667 (15M Cache, 2.90 GHz, 8.00 GT/s Intel® QPI) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2667 (15M Cache, 2.90 GHz, 8.00 GT/s Intel® QPI) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

 

[Toothless]

It could very well be possible. Remember X58 and it's supposed 24GB limit which then turned into 48GB with the advent of 8GB DIMMs? So maybe 128GB is possible with the right DIMMs and the right config.

EDIT: Just looked it up, if a board has 8 DIMM slots and 16GB DIMMs were used, there's the 128GB. 16GB DIMMs do exist, and right now they're seriously inexpensive..
Example;

16GB HP Hynix 712383-081 708641-B21 HMT42GR7AFR4C-RD PC3-14900R DDR3 1866 LOT for sale online | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for 16GB HP Hynix 712383-081 708641-B21 HMT42GR7AFR4C-RD PC3-14900R DDR3 1866 LOT at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

EDIT2:
With the Xeon range for X79, the RAM limits are between 384GB and 768GB. So at least in the specs 128GB should be doable. For reference, here's the specs for my 2667V2.

Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2667 v2 (25M Cache, 3.30 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2667 v2 (25M Cache, 3.30 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

ark.intel.com

Here's the V1 specs.

Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2667 (15M Cache, 2.90 GHz, 8.00 GT/s Intel® QPI) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2667 (15M Cache, 2.90 GHz, 8.00 GT/s Intel® QPI) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

Thing with those limits is typically x79 the cpu will out do the board for support. With a lot of consumer/prosumer boards only getting the official stuff to 64GB (or with the Classified, 32GB) however with socket 1366 the max ram that could be supported was due to those bigger dimms not being out there.

Personally, I'd rather stick to what the manual says. Don't want to chance buying something and only being able to use half.

 

[remixedcat]

Well my Dell Inspiron 15 3525 says the max is 16GB but ppl got 64GB working but it ran at 2400mhz instead of 3200mhz.. but ppl got 32gb at 3200mhz working.

 

[Toothless]

Well my Dell Inspiron 15 3525 says the max is 16GB but ppl got 64GB working but it ran at 2400mhz instead of 3200mhz.. but ppl got 32gb at 3200mhz working.

That's way newer, Dell only ships with max 16GB, and of course larger dimms are going to run slower. Also not a Xeon.

Also those chips that are used in those laptops will max at 64GB. We're not seeing a board limitation but a chip limitation.

 

[remixedcat]

That's way newer, Dell only ships with max 16GB, and of course larger dimms are going to run slower. Also not a Xeon.

Also those chips that are used in those laptops will max at 64GB. We're not seeing a board limitation but a chip limitation.

Yeah chipset limits are a thing... sadly my t3600 upgrade was limited to v1s and couldn't do v2 xeons

 

[Toothless]

Yeah chipset limits are a thing... sadly my t3600 upgrade was limited to v1s and couldn't do v2 xeons

That's only because of bios updates lacking from Dell to profit off people upgrading from Sandy to Ivy.

 

[xtreemchaos]

hi guys.
CPU E5-2699
MOBO Frankinstine E5 MR9A PRO from China.
gpu a770 le 16gb
ram 64 gb quad chan 2133.
psu RM850
WIN 11

i was wondering if anyone has found a hack to get rebar working ?
Happy new year.

 

[Edwired]

hi guys.
CPU E5-2699
MOBO Frankinstine E5 MR9A PRO from China.
gpu a770 le 16gb
ram 64 gb quad chan 2133.
psu RM850
WIN 11

i was wondering if anyone has found a hack to get rebar working ?
Happy new year.

GitHub - xCuri0/ReBarUEFI: Resizable BAR for (almost) any UEFI system

Resizable BAR for (almost) any UEFI system. Contribute to xCuri0/ReBarUEFI development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com

Might be useful for information related

 

[lexluthermiester]

however with socket 1366 the max ram that could be supported was due to those bigger dimms not being out there.

It the same with X79, X99, and even X299. As long as the RAM makers follow the operations spec defined by the CPU/Chipset maker, whatever DIMMs they make will work fine. This is why Intel, AMD and all other CPU/memory controller makers state the RAM address limits in the specs. As long as you stay within THOSE limit(not what the board makers say), is very, very likely to work fine.

That's only because of bios updates lacking from Dell to profit off people upgrading from Sandy to Ivy.

No, it was because of a limitation of the early variants of the C600 series chipset. The T3610/T5610/T7610 systems exists because of a revision change to the chipset for the X79 spec.

 

[Toothless]

It the same with X79, X99, and even X299. As long as the RAM makers follow the operations spec defined by the CPU/Chipset maker, whatever DIMMs they make will work fine. This is why Intel, AMD and all other CPU/memory controller makers state the RAM address limits in the specs. As long as you stay within THOSE limit(not what the board makers say), is very, very likely to work fine.


No, it was because of a limitation of the early variants of the C600 series chipset. The T3610/T5610/T7610 systems exists because of a revision change to the chipset for the X79 spec.

When was the C600 changed over? Never seen that before.

 

[lexluthermiester]

When was the C600 changed over? Never seen that before.

I don't know a lot about it. I crossed pathes with the info in the Dell support forums when researching CPU support for the T3600. Some users saying that they got V2's working in their system and some said no joy. The info is kinda spotty, but it is VERY unlike Dell not to support new CPU's with microcode updates. The T3600/T3610 situation is an oddball thing for Dell, as general rule.

 

[remixedcat]

It the same with X79, X99, and even X299. As long as the RAM makers follow the operations spec defined by the CPU/Chipset maker, whatever DIMMs they make will work fine. This is why Intel, AMD and all other CPU/memory controller makers state the RAM address limits in the specs. As long as you stay within THOSE limit(not what the board makers say), is very, very likely to work fine.


No, it was because of a limitation of the early variants of the C600 series chipset. The T3610/T5610/T7610 systems exists because of a revision change to the chipset for the X79 spec.

yes and I'll need that for the v2 you sent me but I'm good for now...

 

[xtreemchaos]

Might be useful for information related

thanks buddy , it looks like my motherboard is supported and reported working.