If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
New thread
[major snippage]
Thanks Paul, I've narrowed my search to two old tools that only work on WinXP to Win7, MemSet41 and CPU-Tweaker. I've copied them to my BartPE dongle. When it is time, I'll test them on my overclocked 4GB RAM to see if the RAM voltage really is 1.8V as it should be. I have a quad core Q6600 CPU which is not really old. If I can see what I need to see, I'll try to fix the RAM voltage on one RAM module. If that works for a long time, I'll try plugging in the second 4GB RAM module. If that works, I'll have 8GB RAM, suitable for the numerous VM's I wish to run. If I cannot boot, I'll go back to one RAM module and start from scratch. You should also be looking at the motherboard, find the regulator chip in the DRAM power section, and get the datasheet for it. That will tell you some basic things about whether options are even available to modify the setting. Some modern chips, have excellent control options. One I modified here, had a voltage offset pin, specifically for boosting. And lesser chips, they have a summing junction, where you can inject current to modify the output. Some of those designs, the overclock settings are way off (not regulated very well). Paul Thanks Paul, For the Intel Q6600, I have downloaded a 30 day trial for Intel's Intel Vtune Amplifier XE. I have not yet rebooted but the program runs and shows some info. If I find anything useful I'll post it here. This URL: http://ark.intel.com/products/29765/...z-1066-MHz-FSB says the Q6600 runs at a max 1.5V, so it cannot give 1.8V for RAM. But maybe an alternative is to provide less aggressive RAM timings. I still need to boot into BartPE to see if MemSet41 or CPU-Tweaker address the MOBO. If you expand this screenshot: https://images.betanews.com/screensh...52682468-1.jpg You'll see that CPU-tweaker does not show or modify RAM voltages, only timings. Maybe underclocking would do the trick. You want the product image, on the same web page. http://ark.intel.com/inc/images/diagrams/diagram-5.gif On LGA775, the MCH connects to memory, rather than the CPU. It's the MCH specs you need. This is an example of an MCH/Northbridge. Because back in the day, we were still calling them Northbridges. http://ark.intel.com/products/31919/...ory-Controller We can then pull the datasheet for that sample MCH. http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/datasheet/317610.pdf VCC_DDR 1.8 V DDR2 / 1.5 V DDR3 System Memory Supply Voltage with respect to VSS -0.3 min 4.0 V max The pad drivers (apparently) have a huge range. Modern CPUs, where there is an IMC (integrated memory controller), the voltage range is a lot lower. (1.65V max on 1.5V I/O devices.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stub_S...rminated_Logic http://www.embedded.com/print/4007526 This is a JEDEC block diagram for SSTL_1.8. The VCCQ would be 1.8V, VTT would be 0.9V, and the requirement for VTT regulator is that it is push-pull, with current flow as large as a couple amps (for the entire bus). The average current flow is a lot lower, so all it needs is a decent sized cap to hold the voltage on the source of VTT. If the address/control or data bus were to be floated, the resting voltage is half way between the rails. https://s17.postimg.org/3miofq03j/sstl_1_8.gif Paul Thanks Paul, Now, only tweaking RAM voltage is expeditious. Given that the chips in question are tiny, I need a circuit diagram for the MCP73VE MOBO and details on whatever IMC is used. There appears to be two pads for testing voltage in that area. From the BIOS Setup program, I get information I have not found at the applications level. CPU Vcore 1.248V Chipset Voltage 1.344V The voltages appear to be lower than specified. The Q6600 works fine, so there is no need to change its voltage. If the Chipset Voltage of 1.344V is used by RAM, it is far lower than 1.8V given in the RAM SPD block. One and only one 4GB RAM module works at the current RAM voltage. With two RAM sticks installed, the S/N ratio does not make memtest happy. I think it would be best to increase RAM voltage by only one increment. We don't want overvoltage on the entire Chipset. It would be self defeating to burn out the MOBO. One other problem is that the RAM voltage increment needs to be applied at the hardware level. It won't work at the application level. First, I should see if the two pads are voltage test points and test the voltage if the pads see DC. If so, they could also be used as DC injection points, after a suitable trace is cut. This is as close as I can get right now, to a block diagram for your board. The search engine isn't giving me much to work with. http://www.theregister.co.uk/Print/2..._nvidia_mcp73/ Those designs use a single chip for Northbridge and Southbridge. The chip should have a decent-sized cooler on it, because it's a pretty busy beast. Underneath the heatsink, is a bare silicon die. If putting the heatsink back on it, you have to be careful not to tilt the heatsink and crack the die. Those don't use a shim for safety (like an AthlonXP might). If the GPU in the Northbridge is being used, that makes it a few watts warmer when gaming. You might even make it to 15W for a chip like that. In any case, the memory is not on the processor. No IMC involved. Just a single chipset chip. The memory runs off that big single chip. The chip could have 1500 balls on it. The core (logic gates) of chipsets, run at the lowest voltage on the board. Around 1V or less. On a chip like that, the core logic could be drawing 5 amps. They use a low voltage, to try to keep the power dissipation in bounds. On a 15W chip, you might want a 1 inch high heatsink, with a 40mm fan. Some of the cheesy designs, don't bother with the fan, and the life of the board can be extended in cases like that, by using a "blow-down" fan on the CPU. It helps cool the chipset. The I/O voltages are going to be higher than that. Chipset chips have at least five rails connected to them. Since this chip is a dual one, that only increases the potential number of supplies on it. You need to find the regulator next to the DIMMs, get the part number, and see what you can learn. Just because there is a monitor point, that's not a good place to be injecting anything. On some of the chips, there is an actual VID interface. And you load some ones and zeros on that bus, to set the voltage. That's the "cadillac" interface. The board would use some GPIOs, and a BIOS setting would drive out the appropriate number to the VID interface. If a chip is considered a "fixed" design, you have a couple options. There is a node called "FB", and you inject a tiny current to offset the output voltage. If you apply too much, the OVP gets tripped, and the regulator shuts down. The other option, is the regulator has a "Boost" terminal, but the same rules will apply. Too much exuberance on the part of the user, and it'll shut down. When I modified the Boost on my Asrock board, I only applied about 0.1V of offset. There is an equation, relating the resistor value to ground from Boost, to the amount of output modification. If I'd doubled the offset, it would probably have tripped the overvoltage protection. The node coming from the output of the switcher, has zero output impedance, and is under closed loop control. The output is "stiff" and cannot be (easily) steered by injection. If you manage somehow, to increase the voltage on that node, and it passes the OVP protection point, they turn on the bottom MOSFET and clamp the rail to ground. With no injector in place, such a design is perfectly safe. The upper MOSFET is turned off, the lower one turned on, the output voltage is zero - this feature exists to prevent "burning" the customer inserted items, such as RAM or CPU. The idea is, the motherboard burns (worst case), but the customer components (RAM and CPU) are saved. But if you inject the node in question, there will then be a fight between the lower MOSFET clamping the node to ground, and your fancy injector trying to raise the node. I would say a good deal of caution is required. If you're going to boost, you at least need the datasheet for the regulator. Any decent "volt modder" knows this. If you don't have a schematic, at least have a datasheet for each regulator you intend to mod. In addition, other voltages like Vtt are involved. But I'm going to pretend for the sake of argument, that the amount of boost applicable, is too small to bother with tweaking Vtt or any other voltage for that matter. Another point is, don't assume the voltage used is 1.8V anyway. A good designer cheats, and is already using 1.9V (1.8 plus 5%), bringing the design right up to the JEDEC limit. Only on server motherboards, do you get strict religion and exactly 1.8V. You'd be surprised how many desktop designs are already slightly bumped. Years ago, on my first motherboard, the motherboard makers back then were making their own "local 3.3V" supply. Even though the power supply made 3.3V, these guys were making 3.5V onboard. I think you can guess why they might do this. Even back then, they were boosting stuff. It's not clear why they thought this was necessary - however, the game was up, when you inserted something like a TNT2, it wanted 6 amps of current from that regulator, and the regulator was designed for a lot less. You got a black screen (and the TNT2 was returned for money-back at GameStop :-) ). Paul Careful study of the M1640 manual images says I want to know more about the ITE 8718FX, near the DIMM slots. ITE is a fabless company in Taiwan, 8718FX is the IC ID. When I do Google search I get a lot of hits for intelligence agencies. Either they do their own service work, or this IC is hackable. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
New thread
Norm X wrote:
Careful study of the M1640 manual images says I want to know more about the ITE 8718FX, near the DIMM slots. ITE is a fabless company in Taiwan, 8718FX is the IC ID. When I do Google search I get a lot of hits for intelligence agencies. Either they do their own service work, or this IC is hackable. That should be about a roughly 128 pin quad flat pack, and is your SuperI/O. That doesn't have regulation functions. It has things like floppy interface, two serial ports, PS/2 keyboard and mouse ports, IRDA interface, and so on. It also typically includes the hardware monitor, three voltages, three fan speeds, three temperatures and so on. While I didn't see a datasheet pop up for that, this has a passing reference to its function. http://manualmachine.com/acer/verito...manual/page:2/ Super I/O controller: ITE 8718FX ******* Power regulators don't generally get too big. Maybe 48 or 64 pins max or so. If a regulator has the MOSFETs inside the package, it may have a heat slug in the bottom center, but there's no way to see that from the outside. While there can be a thermal via field visible on the backside of the motherboard, you'd have to take the thing apart to examine it. The gate capacitance of a power MOSFET can be on the order of 3000pF. That's a large load, being driven at a high frequency. So instead, the arch is like this. Regulator ------ Phase 1 --- Buffer chip - Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET ------ Phase 2 --- Buffer chip - Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET ------ Phase N --- Buffer chip - Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET By doing it that way, the main chip doesn't drive the MOSFETs directly. Doing it this way would save money (and was done in the past)... Regulator ------ Phase 1 ----------------- Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET ------ Phase 2 ----------------- Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET ------ Phase N ----------------- Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET but the FCV^2 of the Phase driver outputs would cause the Regulator chip to overheat, even with a heat slug on the bottom. Using the buffer chips, means the heat is spread out a bit. And to show how loopy some of the motherboard designers are, there is one motherboard, where a tiny 8 pin switcher with a MOSFET inside, runs with a case temperature of 100C. And that's before the room gets hot. You wouldn't know it was there, unless you touched it... It was detected via an IR camera photograph. That's how someone figured it out. Paul |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
New thread
Careful study of the M1640 manual images says I want to know more about
the ITE 8718FX, near the DIMM slots. ITE is a fabless company in Taiwan, 8718FX is the IC ID. When I do Google search I get a lot of hits for intelligence agencies. Either they do their own service work, or this IC is hackable. That should be about a roughly 128 pin quad flat pack, and is your SuperI/O. That doesn't have regulation functions. It has things like floppy interface, two serial ports, PS/2 keyboard and mouse ports, IRDA interface, and so on. It also typically includes the hardware monitor, three voltages, three fan speeds, three temperatures and so on. While I didn't see a datasheet pop up for that, this has a passing reference to its function. http://manualmachine.com/acer/verito...manual/page:2/ Super I/O controller: ITE 8718FX ******* Power regulators don't generally get too big. Maybe 48 or 64 pins max or so. If a regulator has the MOSFETs inside the package, it may have a heat slug in the bottom center, but there's no way to see that from the outside. While there can be a thermal via field visible on the backside of the motherboard, you'd have to take the thing apart to examine it. The gate capacitance of a power MOSFET can be on the order of 3000pF. That's a large load, being driven at a high frequency. So instead, the arch is like this. Regulator ------ Phase 1 --- Buffer chip - Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET ------ Phase 2 --- Buffer chip - Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET ------ Phase N --- Buffer chip - Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET By doing it that way, the main chip doesn't drive the MOSFETs directly. Doing it this way would save money (and was done in the past)... Regulator ------ Phase 1 ----------------- Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET ------ Phase 2 ----------------- Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET ------ Phase N ----------------- Up MOSFET, Down MOSFET but the FCV^2 of the Phase driver outputs would cause the Regulator chip to overheat, even with a heat slug on the bottom. Using the buffer chips, means the heat is spread out a bit. And to show how loopy some of the motherboard designers are, there is one motherboard, where a tiny 8 pin switcher with a MOSFET inside, runs with a case temperature of 100C. And that's before the room gets hot. You wouldn't know it was there, unless you touched it... It was detected via an IR camera photograph. That's how someone figured it out. Paul Thanks again Paul. I'm also making some progress in setting RAM timings using Memset. Memset 4.1 ran smoothly on my Acer Aspire One netbook. It accepts the chip set. I could have changed RAM timings if I wanted to. Googling suggested that my best bet would be with Memset 3.1, for the M1640. However using the Way Back Machine, I was only able to obtain Memset 3.4. It 'almost' ran on my Acer M1640. Maybe the authors reply to email. Alternatively, with time I could disassemble, alter and compile what I want. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cant fine that thread | Fievel J Mousekewitz | Overclocking AMD Processors | 1 | August 1st 08 12:24 AM |
New thread | Robert E. Watts | Packard Bell Computers | 8 | February 7th 08 09:57 PM |
What happened to the IMD thread? | Jeffrey Alsip | Compaq Servers | 5 | September 15th 05 07:55 AM |
Wow i just try x2 the thread and it not like it was. | DDC | Ati Videocards | 0 | August 21st 05 09:11 PM |
Why doesn't - this thread die! | Skeptic | General | 0 | May 2nd 05 12:02 AM |