Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Core i5 2500K Linux Performance

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    woops.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/4142/i...-begins-recall

    Comment


    • #47
      how did you guys overclock and then run in ubuntu? every time I set the multipliers up and boot into ubuntu, I'm back at the default speeds (at least according to cat /proc/cpuinfo).. when I boot into windows, I'm running at the expected 4.7GHz.. what gives?

      asus p8p67 deluxe
      i7 2600k
      ubuntu 10.10 / windows 7 dual boot

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by tamale View Post
        how did you guys overclock and then run in ubuntu? every time I set the multipliers up and boot into ubuntu, I'm back at the default speeds (at least according to cat /proc/cpuinfo).. when I boot into windows, I'm running at the expected 4.7GHz.. what gives?

        asus p8p67 deluxe
        i7 2600k
        ubuntu 10.10 / windows 7 dual boot
        I think there is an issue with it reporting the wrong information only. saw on another forum some firmware update on their board fixed it (i think). memory is a little vague. only have a h67 myself so no overclocking the cpu of my i5-2500k (nor interest to do so luckily )

        Comment


        • #49
          Using the drm-intel-next kernel the experience is improved a bit for me... but I can still cause tiling corruption under certain cases, but I do have a few test profiles now working correctly most of the time.

          Intel's Jesse Barnes has now also been able to reproduce my SNB Linux problems.
          Michael Larabel
          http://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Kenni View Post
            Hmm, I've just upgraded one of my CentOS 5.5 systems with a Core i7 2600 + Intel DH67CL motherboard (with H67 chipset). Due to the problems with the integrated graphics mentioned in the last Sandy Bridge Phoronix article, I moved over the old and reliable Geforce 7xxx PCI-e 16x graphics card from the old system and disabled the integrated graphics permanently in the BIOS.

            The system got exactly a few seconds past GRUB and then it crashed. I further disabled all the fancy stuff; USB3, onboard audio, SATA 3.0, etc. and after a few tries the system booted X11 and then it crashed after 20-30 seconds.

            I still have several things to test in order to draw any conclusions, but it's not looking good so far

            New BIOS, memtest86 and test of a newer Linux distribution is up next.
            I finally identified the issue, the onboard SATA 3.0 has issues. Once I moved the HDDs to the SATA 2.0 controller, the system got rock stable.

            It didn't matter if I ran Ubuntu 10.10, Ubuntu 11.04 Alpha1 or CentOS (with kernel 2.6.18 or 2.6.37), they all crashed eventually.

            I don't know if it's a local HW problem on my board, but if your Sandy Bridge Intel board is unstable, try to skip the SATA 3.0 ports to see if it helps.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Kenni View Post
              I finally identified the issue, the onboard SATA 3.0 has issues. Once I moved the HDDs to the SATA 2.0 controller, the system got rock stable.

              It didn't matter if I ran Ubuntu 10.10, Ubuntu 11.04 Alpha1 or CentOS (with kernel 2.6.18 or 2.6.37), they all crashed eventually.

              I don't know if it's a local HW problem on my board, but if your Sandy Bridge Intel board is unstable, try to skip the SATA 3.0 ports to see if it helps.
              Intel has stopped production of Sandy Bridge motherboards and is recalling all shipped motherboards due to SATA issues. Check with your manufacturer to find out how to return and replace yours.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                Intel has stopped production of Sandy Bridge motherboards and is recalling all shipped motherboards due to SATA issues. Check with your manufacturer to find out how to return and replace yours.
                Yep, I am fully aware of that, but the Intel SATA issues are with the SATA 2.0 controller - the SATA 3.0 controller should not be affected by the Intel production problems.[1]

                In other words, I'm forced to use the SATA 2.0 controller, the controller which has caused Intel to recall all motherboards - and it works perfectly fine right now, unlike the "unaffected" SATA 3.0 controller.

                [1] http://www.tomshardware.com/news/cou...ror,12108.html

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Michael View Post
                  Using the drm-intel-next kernel the experience is improved a bit for me... but I can still cause tiling corruption under certain cases, but I do have a few test profiles now working correctly most of the time.

                  Intel's Jesse Barnes has now also been able to reproduce my SNB Linux problems.
                  Your article is however still very inaccurate. anyone reading it would come away thinking just about every opengl app will fail on sandy bridge, which is not true. I have not seen any graphical problems apart from a font glyph cache issue that was present for a few git revisions in the xf86-video-intel driver - now fixed, and a issue where occasionally using compiz, the screen doesn't redraw completely. the latter is a minor glitch and everything else works fine. is it too hard to put a little bit of text on the article to state that despite your problems, other have it working fine for example?

                  of course, there are other problems with the sandy bridge chipset, regarding sata but that's another issue

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    also it has been pointed out already on this thread but not corrected in the article about performance that

                    There is also the Core i5 2500 non-K processor that retails for about $10 less than the K version, with the sole difference being the 2500K being an unlocked processor so it will be able to overclock better. If doing any overclocking, you are best off with the K variant. The K variant does, however, lack VT-d support.
                    the "sole difference" is not correct. the K series have the more powerful GPU on board - hence there is a point to buying a K series chip for an H board, even though you won't be able to overclock the cpu.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X