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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardware problems
Hi,
A 'lot of diffuse hardware problems' is a story too long to recite. I was reluctant to upgrade to a BETA BIOS. When I did I thought I'd bricked the machine. After a nights sleep, I realized the upgrade had reset to defaults / PCI monitor rather than PCIe. Now hardware works perfect. However, 500GB Seagate Barracuda says it has 30% life left. The red light that indicates drive activity glowed too often. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardware problems
Norm Why wrote:
Hi, A 'lot of diffuse hardware problems' is a story too long to recite. I was reluctant to upgrade to a BETA BIOS. When I did I thought I'd bricked the machine. After a nights sleep, I realized the upgrade had reset to defaults / PCI monitor rather than PCIe. Now hardware works perfect. However, 500GB Seagate Barracuda says it has 30% life left. The red light that indicates drive activity glowed too often. The SMART table here can allow looking at individual parameters. http://hdtune.com/files/hdtune_255.exe That means the raw data field in the "Reallocated" has gone non-zero. At a guess. Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardware problems
A 'lot of diffuse hardware problems' is a story too long to recite. I was reluctant to upgrade to a BETA BIOS. When I did I thought I'd bricked the machine. After a nights sleep, I realized the upgrade had reset to defaults / PCI monitor rather than PCIe. Now hardware works perfect. However, 500GB Seagate Barracuda says it has 30% life left. The red light that indicates drive activity glowed too often. The SMART table here can allow looking at individual parameters. http://hdtune.com/files/hdtune_255.exe That means the raw data field in the "Reallocated" has gone non-zero. At a guess. Paul Thanks Paul, Using that tool, '(05) Reallocated Sector Count' was displayed for the 500GB Samsung EVO SSD, but not for the 500 GB Seagate Barracuda SSD. It's connected to a different controller, a PCIe (x1) SATAIII card. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardwareproblems
Norm Why wrote:
A 'lot of diffuse hardware problems' is a story too long to recite. I was reluctant to upgrade to a BETA BIOS. When I did I thought I'd bricked the machine. After a nights sleep, I realized the upgrade had reset to defaults / PCI monitor rather than PCIe. Now hardware works perfect. However, 500GB Seagate Barracuda says it has 30% life left. The red light that indicates drive activity glowed too often. The SMART table here can allow looking at individual parameters. http://hdtune.com/files/hdtune_255.exe That means the raw data field in the "Reallocated" has gone non-zero. At a guess. Paul Thanks Paul, Using that tool, '(05) Reallocated Sector Count' was displayed for the 500GB Samsung EVO SSD, but not for the 500 GB Seagate Barracuda SSD. It's connected to a different controller, a PCIe (x1) SATAIII card. Sorry, I thought that 500GB Seagate Barracuda was a HDD. The HDTune tool is too old to display SSD tables properly. You were probably using some Toolkit to get that number, and maybe the Toolkit has the SMART table in it somewhere. My SSD samples here, tend to have rounded numbers, like 256GB or 512GB, rather than 250 and 500 values. The red glow, means SATA commands are coming in. The drive can still be writing, as it rearranges the data, but the LED does not light while this is happening. Any LED glows, indicate your OS is doing something. You would need to probe further, to figure out whether the operations are read or write. (Task Manager has I/O columns you can turn on for this.) The SSD has a processor inside, and it is running for as long as the drive has power. Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardware problems
A 'lot of diffuse hardware problems' is a story too long to recite. I
was reluctant to upgrade to a BETA BIOS. When I did I thought I'd bricked the machine. After a nights sleep, I realized the upgrade had reset to defaults / PCI monitor rather than PCIe. Now hardware works perfect. However, 500GB Seagate Barracuda says it has 30% life left. The red light that indicates drive activity glowed too often. The SMART table here can allow looking at individual parameters. http://hdtune.com/files/hdtune_255.exe That means the raw data field in the "Reallocated" has gone non-zero. At a guess. Paul Thanks Paul, Using that tool, '(05) Reallocated Sector Count' was displayed for the 500GB Samsung EVO SSD, but not for the 500 GB Seagate Barracuda SSD. It's connected to a different controller, a PCIe (x1) SATAIII card. Sorry, I thought that 500GB Seagate Barracuda was a HDD. The HDTune tool is too old to display SSD tables properly. You were probably using some Toolkit to get that number, and maybe the Toolkit has the SMART table in it somewhere. My SSD samples here, tend to have rounded numbers, like 256GB or 512GB, rather than 250 and 500 values. The red glow, means SATA commands are coming in. The drive can still be writing, as it rearranges the data, but the LED does not light while this is happening. Any LED glows, indicate your OS is doing something. You would need to probe further, to figure out whether the operations are read or write. (Task Manager has I/O columns you can turn on for this.) The SSD has a processor inside, and it is running for as long as the drive has power. Paul Thanks again Paul, I'm still trying to solve some performance issues. Here is: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 Shizuku Edition (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 181.235 MB/s Sequential Write : 156.012 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 150.887 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 26.341 MB/s [ 6431.0 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 38.755 MB/s [ 9461.7 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 127.105 MB/s [ 31031.5 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 106.460 MB/s [ 25991.2 IOPS] Test : 50 MB [D: 21.7% (101.2/465.8 GB)] (x1) Date : 2021/04/10 15:58:02 OS : Windows 8.1 Pro [6.3 Build 9600] (x64) Test of Seagate Barracuda. Note anomalous Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s. Could this low number indicate problem with Seagate Barracuda or with cable. I'm using a 7 conductor cable, 2 pairs +/- data, 3 ground. Is my Seagate damaged? Is my cable insufficient? What about 'twinax'? Maybe my Startech PCIe SATA controller is to blame. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardwareproblems
Norm Why wrote:
A 'lot of diffuse hardware problems' is a story too long to recite. I was reluctant to upgrade to a BETA BIOS. When I did I thought I'd bricked the machine. After a nights sleep, I realized the upgrade had reset to defaults / PCI monitor rather than PCIe. Now hardware works perfect. However, 500GB Seagate Barracuda says it has 30% life left. The red light that indicates drive activity glowed too often. The SMART table here can allow looking at individual parameters. http://hdtune.com/files/hdtune_255.exe That means the raw data field in the "Reallocated" has gone non-zero. At a guess. Paul Thanks Paul, Using that tool, '(05) Reallocated Sector Count' was displayed for the 500GB Samsung EVO SSD, but not for the 500 GB Seagate Barracuda SSD. It's connected to a different controller, a PCIe (x1) SATAIII card. Sorry, I thought that 500GB Seagate Barracuda was a HDD. The HDTune tool is too old to display SSD tables properly. You were probably using some Toolkit to get that number, and maybe the Toolkit has the SMART table in it somewhere. My SSD samples here, tend to have rounded numbers, like 256GB or 512GB, rather than 250 and 500 values. The red glow, means SATA commands are coming in. The drive can still be writing, as it rearranges the data, but the LED does not light while this is happening. Any LED glows, indicate your OS is doing something. You would need to probe further, to figure out whether the operations are read or write. (Task Manager has I/O columns you can turn on for this.) The SSD has a processor inside, and it is running for as long as the drive has power. Paul Thanks again Paul, I'm still trying to solve some performance issues. Here is: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 Shizuku Edition (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 181.235 MB/s Sequential Write : 156.012 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 150.887 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 26.341 MB/s [ 6431.0 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 38.755 MB/s [ 9461.7 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 127.105 MB/s [ 31031.5 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 106.460 MB/s [ 25991.2 IOPS] Test : 50 MB [D: 21.7% (101.2/465.8 GB)] (x1) Date : 2021/04/10 15:58:02 OS : Windows 8.1 Pro [6.3 Build 9600] (x64) Test of Seagate Barracuda. Note anomalous Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s. Could this low number indicate problem with Seagate Barracuda or with cable. I'm using a 7 conductor cable, 2 pairs +/- data, 3 ground. Is my Seagate damaged? Is my cable insufficient? What about 'twinax'? Maybe my Startech PCIe SATA controller is to blame. I did "not much of a test here", on a Win8.1 setup and crystaldiskinfo 3.0.4 and the 512KB results are just a bit lower than the sequential. There's no huge dive like in your 2.018 MB/s result. It's not PIO mode, because that would affect read and write. It's not error rate, because the other results are too good for that. Why would it just ruin the 512KB stuff ? I'm sure by now, you've compared your exact model number, to graphs already published on the web. And I bet theirs don't dip like that. You do see the occasional ATTO that is out-of-sorts. Where one particular transfer size is not as good as it could be. But I don't know if that would be 512KB - it would usually be some smaller transfer size. See if you can dig up someone elses results for your drive. And if it were AHCI versus non-AHCI, I doubt that would do it either. There is a good chance a 512KB read or 512KB write, would be one "transaction" and multiple packets. Rather than being some crazy series of tagged queue requests to do the job. The cabling is usually pretty good. Only if the cable is kinked, with a permanent pinch mark, would I be concerned. This sometimes happens when importing cables, the cables are wrapped in a bundle, and if some weight falls on the bundle, the cable could get crushed. There is a counter in SMART for CRC errors on the cable. But that counter would be for only one of the two directions. On a CRC error, there is likely a retransmit request. I don't think it's an ECC, and repaired on the spot. I can't think why that would be. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardware problems
Using that tool, '(05) Reallocated Sector Count' was displayed for the 500GB Samsung EVO SSD, but not for the 500 GB Seagate Barracuda SSD. It's connected to a different controller, a PCIe (x1) SATAIII card. Sorry, I thought that 500GB Seagate Barracuda was a HDD. The HDTune tool is too old to display SSD tables properly. You were probably using some Toolkit to get that number, and maybe the Toolkit has the SMART table in it somewhere. My SSD samples here, tend to have rounded numbers, like 256GB or 512GB, rather than 250 and 500 values. The red glow, means SATA commands are coming in. The drive can still be writing, as it rearranges the data, but the LED does not light while this is happening. Any LED glows, indicate your OS is doing something. You would need to probe further, to figure out whether the operations are read or write. (Task Manager has I/O columns you can turn on for this.) The SSD has a processor inside, and it is running for as long as the drive has power. Paul Thanks again Paul, I'm still trying to solve some performance issues. Here is: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 Shizuku Edition (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 181.235 MB/s Sequential Write : 156.012 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 150.887 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 26.341 MB/s [ 6431.0 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 38.755 MB/s [ 9461.7 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 127.105 MB/s [ 31031.5 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 106.460 MB/s [ 25991.2 IOPS] Test : 50 MB [D: 21.7% (101.2/465.8 GB)] (x1) Date : 2021/04/10 15:58:02 OS : Windows 8.1 Pro [6.3 Build 9600] (x64) Test of Seagate Barracuda. Note anomalous Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s. Could this low number indicate problem with Seagate Barracuda or with cable. I'm using a 7 conductor cable, 2 pairs +/- data, 3 ground. Is my Seagate damaged? Is my cable insufficient? What about 'twinax'? Maybe my Startech PCIe SATA controller is to blame. I did "not much of a test here", on a Win8.1 setup and crystaldiskinfo 3.0.4 and the 512KB results are just a bit lower than the sequential. There's no huge dive like in your 2.018 MB/s result. It's not PIO mode, because that would affect read and write. It's not error rate, because the other results are too good for that. Why would it just ruin the 512KB stuff ? I'm sure by now, you've compared your exact model number, to graphs already published on the web. And I bet theirs don't dip like that. You do see the occasional ATTO that is out-of-sorts. Where one particular transfer size is not as good as it could be. But I don't know if that would be 512KB - it would usually be some smaller transfer size. See if you can dig up someone elses results for your drive. And if it were AHCI versus non-AHCI, I doubt that would do it either. There is a good chance a 512KB read or 512KB write, would be one "transaction" and multiple packets. Rather than being some crazy series of tagged queue requests to do the job. The cabling is usually pretty good. Only if the cable is kinked, with a permanent pinch mark, would I be concerned. This sometimes happens when importing cables, the cables are wrapped in a bundle, and if some weight falls on the bundle, the cable could get crushed. There is a counter in SMART for CRC errors on the cable. But that counter would be for only one of the two directions. On a CRC error, there is likely a retransmit request. I don't think it's an ECC, and repaired on the spot. I can't think why that would be. Paul Thanks for your thoughts. Here is a picture from Wikipedia. "Cross section of a SATA 3.0 cable, showing the dual Twinax conductors for the differential pairs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinax...winAxCable.jpg Better class 6 Ethernet cable is twinax. I would think better SATA 3 cable should be twinax. What do you think? I can't find such cable anywhere, just 7 conductor. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardwareproblems
Norm Why wrote:
Using that tool, '(05) Reallocated Sector Count' was displayed for the 500GB Samsung EVO SSD, but not for the 500 GB Seagate Barracuda SSD. It's connected to a different controller, a PCIe (x1) SATAIII card. Sorry, I thought that 500GB Seagate Barracuda was a HDD. The HDTune tool is too old to display SSD tables properly. You were probably using some Toolkit to get that number, and maybe the Toolkit has the SMART table in it somewhere. My SSD samples here, tend to have rounded numbers, like 256GB or 512GB, rather than 250 and 500 values. The red glow, means SATA commands are coming in. The drive can still be writing, as it rearranges the data, but the LED does not light while this is happening. Any LED glows, indicate your OS is doing something. You would need to probe further, to figure out whether the operations are read or write. (Task Manager has I/O columns you can turn on for this.) The SSD has a processor inside, and it is running for as long as the drive has power. Paul Thanks again Paul, I'm still trying to solve some performance issues. Here is: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 Shizuku Edition (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 181.235 MB/s Sequential Write : 156.012 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 150.887 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 26.341 MB/s [ 6431.0 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 38.755 MB/s [ 9461.7 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 127.105 MB/s [ 31031.5 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 106.460 MB/s [ 25991.2 IOPS] Test : 50 MB [D: 21.7% (101.2/465.8 GB)] (x1) Date : 2021/04/10 15:58:02 OS : Windows 8.1 Pro [6.3 Build 9600] (x64) Test of Seagate Barracuda. Note anomalous Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s. Could this low number indicate problem with Seagate Barracuda or with cable. I'm using a 7 conductor cable, 2 pairs +/- data, 3 ground. Is my Seagate damaged? Is my cable insufficient? What about 'twinax'? Maybe my Startech PCIe SATA controller is to blame. I did "not much of a test here", on a Win8.1 setup and crystaldiskinfo 3.0.4 and the 512KB results are just a bit lower than the sequential. There's no huge dive like in your 2.018 MB/s result. It's not PIO mode, because that would affect read and write. It's not error rate, because the other results are too good for that. Why would it just ruin the 512KB stuff ? I'm sure by now, you've compared your exact model number, to graphs already published on the web. And I bet theirs don't dip like that. You do see the occasional ATTO that is out-of-sorts. Where one particular transfer size is not as good as it could be. But I don't know if that would be 512KB - it would usually be some smaller transfer size. See if you can dig up someone elses results for your drive. And if it were AHCI versus non-AHCI, I doubt that would do it either. There is a good chance a 512KB read or 512KB write, would be one "transaction" and multiple packets. Rather than being some crazy series of tagged queue requests to do the job. The cabling is usually pretty good. Only if the cable is kinked, with a permanent pinch mark, would I be concerned. This sometimes happens when importing cables, the cables are wrapped in a bundle, and if some weight falls on the bundle, the cable could get crushed. There is a counter in SMART for CRC errors on the cable. But that counter would be for only one of the two directions. On a CRC error, there is likely a retransmit request. I don't think it's an ECC, and repaired on the spot. I can't think why that would be. Paul Thanks for your thoughts. Here is a picture from Wikipedia. "Cross section of a SATA 3.0 cable, showing the dual Twinax conductors for the differential pairs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinax...winAxCable.jpg Better class 6 Ethernet cable is twinax. I would think better SATA 3 cable should be twinax. What do you think? I can't find such cable anywhere, just 7 conductor. SATA cabling is nicer electrically than Ethernet. SATA is a "brute force" technology, in terms of signal processing, and it's "how fast of a sine wave can I run down a coax". One thing I like about high speed interconnect, is you can scope it, and it can be a "blur" and... it still works. That always freaks me out :-) The trick there is clock extraction and knowing when to sample the blurry thing. The 8B10B code gives a bounds on number of edges per symbol time, that ensures there's something to extract a clock from. There's really no excuse for not being able to recover a signal off that SATA cable. Paul |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardware problems
The HDTune tool is too old to display SSD tables properly.
You were probably using some Toolkit to get that number, and maybe the Toolkit has the SMART table in it somewhere. My SSD samples here, tend to have rounded numbers, like 256GB or 512GB, rather than 250 and 500 values. The red glow, means SATA commands are coming in. The drive can still be writing, as it rearranges the data, but the LED does not light while this is happening. Any LED glows, indicate your OS is doing something. You would need to probe further, to figure out whether the operations are read or write. (Task Manager has I/O columns you can turn on for this.) The SSD has a processor inside, and it is running for as long as the drive has power. Paul Thanks again Paul, I'm still trying to solve some performance issues. Here is: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 Shizuku Edition (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 181.235 MB/s Sequential Write : 156.012 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 150.887 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 26.341 MB/s [ 6431.0 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 38.755 MB/s [ 9461.7 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 127.105 MB/s [ 31031.5 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 106.460 MB/s [ 25991.2 IOPS] Test : 50 MB [D: 21.7% (101.2/465.8 GB)] (x1) Date : 2021/04/10 15:58:02 OS : Windows 8.1 Pro [6.3 Build 9600] (x64) Test of Seagate Barracuda. Note anomalous Random Read 512KB : 2.018 MB/s. Could this low number indicate problem with Seagate Barracuda or with cable. I'm using a 7 conductor cable, 2 pairs +/- data, 3 ground. Is my Seagate damaged? Is my cable insufficient? What about 'twinax'? Maybe my Startech PCIe SATA controller is to blame. I did "not much of a test here", on a Win8.1 setup and crystaldiskinfo 3.0.4 and the 512KB results are just a bit lower than the sequential. There's no huge dive like in your 2.018 MB/s result. It's not PIO mode, because that would affect read and write. It's not error rate, because the other results are too good for that. Why would it just ruin the 512KB stuff ? I'm sure by now, you've compared your exact model number, to graphs already published on the web. And I bet theirs don't dip like that. You do see the occasional ATTO that is out-of-sorts. Where one particular transfer size is not as good as it could be. But I don't know if that would be 512KB - it would usually be some smaller transfer size. See if you can dig up someone elses results for your drive. And if it were AHCI versus non-AHCI, I doubt that would do it either. There is a good chance a 512KB read or 512KB write, would be one "transaction" and multiple packets. Rather than being some crazy series of tagged queue requests to do the job. The cabling is usually pretty good. Only if the cable is kinked, with a permanent pinch mark, would I be concerned. This sometimes happens when importing cables, the cables are wrapped in a bundle, and if some weight falls on the bundle, the cable could get crushed. There is a counter in SMART for CRC errors on the cable. But that counter would be for only one of the two directions. On a CRC error, there is likely a retransmit request. I don't think it's an ECC, and repaired on the spot. I can't think why that would be. Paul Thanks for your thoughts. Here is a picture from Wikipedia. "Cross section of a SATA 3.0 cable, showing the dual Twinax conductors for the differential pairs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinax...winAxCable.jpg Better class 6 Ethernet cable is twinax. I would think better SATA 3 cable should be twinax. What do you think? I can't find such cable anywhere, just 7 conductor. SATA cabling is nicer electrically than Ethernet. SATA is a "brute force" technology, in terms of signal processing, and it's "how fast of a sine wave can I run down a coax". One thing I like about high speed interconnect, is you can scope it, and it can be a "blur" and... it still works. That always freaks me out :-) The trick there is clock extraction and knowing when to sample the blurry thing. The 8B10B code gives a bounds on number of edges per symbol time, that ensures there's something to extract a clock from. There's really no excuse for not being able to recover a signal off that SATA cable. Paul Thanks for the advice. Curiosity: I managed by magic, to get IPv6 working on 'Big Metal'. Now IPv6 addressing works on the other two Windows machines on my network. Event Viewer shows far fewer (or zero) events. But no events related to RDP, which I use exclusively. So, IPv6 addressing is essential for smooth RDP. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Gigabyte BIOS Upgrade F11b BETA solved a lot of diffuse hardware problems
[massive snippage]
Thanks for the advice. Curiosity: I managed by magic, to get IPv6 working on 'Big Metal'. Now IPv6 addressing works on the other two Windows machines on my network. Event Viewer shows far fewer (or zero) events. But no events related to RDP, which I use exclusively. So, IPv6 addressing is essential for smooth RDP. -maybe. I should explain this so I get more advise. For many moons, a piece of hardware gave me heartbreak. The heartbreak was so bad I was forced to do a clean install. I lost the Gigabyte drivers. In order to connect with to the Internet I used a wireless dongle. Then I was able to re-install the Gigabyte Ethernet drivers. Instantly, IPv6 worked through Hercules, HE.net. Once IPv6 works on one machine it works on all machines on the network, that have been set up. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Problems with DVD burners in Vista on Gigabyte motherboard - Solved | Kent Smith | Gigabyte Motherboards | 3 | July 16th 07 01:24 PM |
Gigabyte 965p DS3 F8 beta bios. can i have the latest one please :) | Paul Mathews | Gigabyte Motherboards | 3 | November 20th 06 12:58 AM |
Gigabyte DS3/DS4/DQ6 beta bios | Richard Dower | Gigabyte Motherboards | 0 | August 3rd 06 01:49 PM |
No sound after Bios upgrade on Gigabyte GA-K8NXP-9 | Sheefa | Gigabyte Motherboards | 1 | June 9th 05 12:26 AM |
K8V SE Deluxe BIOS 1004sd.001 (beta) problems | Charlie King | Asus Motherboards | 2 | June 28th 04 12:59 PM |