Contribute
Register

USB oddities and sleep problem

Status
Not open for further replies.
ShavenYak said:
I've already got the new RAM on the way. It's not that expensive. I'm hoping it might also help out with my issues with USB freezing - which, it turns out, still happens on the USB 3 ports too.

I don't think I should have to run memory at lower than advertised speeds to have a stable system - if that's the case, it's defective. I'm gonna try to get g.skill to exchange it once I determine for sure that it's the problem.

Change your memory back to 1600.
This does not sound like a hardware memory problem to me. Install Linux or maybe a live cd. Perhaps Ubuntu which comes with a lot of drivers and good detection.
See if you have the same peripheral problems/wake up, still with a different OS and different drivers. If you still have the same problems that confirms a memory problem probably; and if you don't it means the memory is fine and that some aspect of the Mac OS software(or bios) is the culprit. I bought Corsair memory DDR3 capable of 1600 but had to enable it in the bios. I think that if Corsair advertised it as 1600 capable then it very likely is, unless you have mixed and matched memory from different packages into the slots. If you order different memory and it works, it doesn't prove the old memory was bad. Only testing the same memory with a different OS will do that. This points to why the suggested upgrading of bios is a good idea also, both approaches are linked. Did the DSDT you borrowed specify DDR3/1600 or DDR2/? memory, or not mentioned; I'm wondering about what F8 bios supports, what system this DSDT was generated by. I think checking the memory and its behavior with another OS is the cheapest and most logical of the next troubleshooting steps.
 
ShavenYak said:
Interesting, I just found this thread yesterday: http://www.tonymacx86.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4647&hilit=bad+memory+sleep.

I've clocked my RAM back to 1333, and preliminary tests are promising (machine woke up this morning with video functional - keyboard still needed to be replugged). I'll want to try a few more times before calling it "fixed". And then, if that happens, what to do with the memory? Seems to me if memory is advertised as 1600 MHz but causes system instability at that speed, it's defective and should be replaced, but I wonder if either Newegg or G.Skill are going to agree, and if so what kind of RAM should I replace it with?

PS - Stork, I see we have the same memory modules. Intriguing. Why don't you try underclocking yours to 1333 before hassling with changing it?
Have you run memtest+ to test for RAM issues?
 
Perhaps you already know about this but I'm sure it will benefit some readers. With the advent of the i7 cpus, integrated memory controllers are now part of the cpu. And so memory problems are less immediately identifiable with defective memory than with a lemon integrated memory controller. Very slightly bent cpu pins can manifest memory problems, and one needs a magnifying glass to see them and a needle to straighten.

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/intel ... em-p1.html
"LGA1156 and LGA1366: differences in memory subsystems

If you take a closer look at motherboards for both platforms, you will see practically no noticeable differences: both camps are equipped with four or six DDR3 memory slots. In fact, they can use them differently. What concerns LGA1366 systems, all six slots can be populated with any modules (up to 4GB ones) with the total size of up to 24GB. But don't expect such miracles from the lower platform, even if you have a motherboard with six slots (like our Gigabyte P55-UD6). LGA1156 supports three memory modules per channel, but under a very strict condition: the total number of supported banks cannot exceed eight. That is if you install two-bank modules, you can fill only four slots out of six. You can use all slots only with single-bank modules. As for us, all memory modules in our lab (even 1GB modules) used two banks. So what's the conclusion? For one, don't chase after six memory slots. You will most likely use no more than four anyway. Besides, maximum memory capacity is not affected by how many slots are installed. Single-bank modules have lower capacity than two-bank modules (twice as low actually). So the maximum capacity for this platform is 16GB so far. And if you use inexpensive 2GB modules, the maximum capacity will be only 8GB.

That's the 1.5 difference from 12GB or 24GB on the LGA1366 platform, which is dictated by the difference between triple- and dual-channel controllers. But don't jump at conclusions. In fact, the integrated controller in processors for LGA1366 supports 18 memory banks, not 12. But there is one restriction: only DDR3 800 memory is supported in this case. If only two modules per channel are installed (that's exactly what owners of X58-based motherboards have to do, as manufacturers are in no hurry to install nine slots there), we get DDR3 1066 or even 1333. DDR3-1333 and probably even faster modules (1600 or higher) will work only when a single module is installed per channel.

So we can draw a conclusion that the memory controller in LGA1366 processors is very complex: it supports twice as much memory as its new desktop competitor. What concerns LGA1156, it has fewer channels and simpler structure. And by the way, it may even work faster. This happens quite often. E.g., engines of heavy-duty dump trucks often have the same horsepower as sport car engines. But the former convert all the power to high carrying capacity, so they cannot compete even with a budget compact in terms speed. The same concerns processors for different platforms. So let's run our tests to see what's going on exactly.

SH: I did quite a bit of research for my mainboard (6 ram slots) before ordering DDR3, tri-channel.

TR3X6G1600C9 XMS3 $90 for 3-pack of 2GB ram

Review:"I bought 12 GB (2 sets) of this memory for use in my self-built Intel i7 computer.
It works, all 12 GB shows up, and it runs at the stock speed of 1067 MHZ. If I install 6 GB it will run at the rated speed of 1600 MHZ, but 12 GB is just too much for my computer to handle at that speed with this memory, and I can't push it past 1067. In other words, this is great memory if you are planning on going with 6 GB in your system. Anymore than that and you won't be able to push it up to its rated speed."
Was this Computer Memory review on the Corsair Memory, Inc. XMS3 Tri Channel 6GB PC12800 DDR3 Memory (Model #TR3X6G1600C9) helpful to you?

Review 2: I wish I'd researched a little more since 12 gigs of this won't run at 1600 mhz
on my motherboard, but 8 gigs will! No issues, but I don't OC either."

CMX6GX3M3A1600C9 $101 for 3-pack of 2GB ram

Both of these 3-pack 2GB modules were supposed to support 1600. So I bought the $12 cheaper one and discovered the reviews later. Who knew the difference between two-bank and one-bank modules which are enclosed in a heat dissipative structure. So the moral of the story is to buy 3 4GB modules even if they cost more, than 6 2GB sticks.
They have hardware compatibility lists for most major memory vendors.

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/intel ... 00-p1.html
LGA1156 Platform and DDR3-1600 Memory
We got the best of 8 GB memory kits from Corsair, namely CMD8GX3M4A1600C8, which can work at 1600 MHz with 8-8-8-24 timings (at the normal voltage level of 1.65 V), equipped with additional fans for better cooling.
 
ShavenYak said:
Quick update: I haven't gotten it to lose the display on wake yet with the memory clocked at 1333. It does it fairly consistently at 1600. I think I'm going to try a pair of the CL7 modules. If they work properly at 1600, I'll put my CL9 modules on eBay. Unless someone here who only runs at 1333 wants them?

I became curious about this topic and read quite a bit. The CL7 modules looks like a good idea but my conclusion is probably for a different reason than you used. The amount of ram is much more important than the speed of the ram.

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/intel ... em-p2.html (and page 3)
"There's a noticeable performance drop, when the memory volume is reduced from 6GB to 4GB. However, expanding memory from 6GB to 8GB gives no results. Why? The size of the processed file is optimized for systems with 6GB of memory :) If it had been smaller, 4GB would have been fine. If bigger, even 6GB would have been insufficient. ....

It apparently makes no sense to chase after higher-frequency memory for a processor running in the nominal mode: even upgrading from DDR3 1066 to DDR3-1333 yields almost nothing. DDR3 1600 will be even less beneficial. So what's the target audience of DDR3 1600, 1866, etc? Why do motherboard manufacturers report so proudly about such support? They apparently focus on overclockers."
 
ShavenYak said:
Interesting, I just found this thread yesterday: http://www.tonymacx86.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4647&hilit=bad+memory+sleep.

I've clocked my RAM back to 1333, and preliminary tests are promising (machine woke up this morning with video functional - keyboard still needed to be replugged). I'll want to try a few more times before calling it "fixed". And then, if that happens, what to do with the memory? Seems to me if memory is advertised as 1600 MHz but causes system instability at that speed, it's defective and should be replaced, but I wonder if either Newegg or G.Skill are going to agree, and if so what kind of RAM should I replace it with?

PS - Stork, I see we have the same memory modules. Intriguing. Why don't you try underclocking yours to 1333 before hassling with changing it?
I am trying your suggestion and have, like you, mixed results. (I say "trying" because I'm not convinced that my wake-up from sleep problem is due to RAM speed.) So far, its wake-up from sleep works sometimes.
ShavenYak said:
Quick update: I haven't gotten it to lose the display on wake yet with the memory clocked at 1333. It does it fairly consistently at 1600. I think I'm going to try a pair of the CL7 modules. If they work properly at 1600, I'll put my CL9 modules on eBay. Unless someone here who only runs at 1333 wants them?
I lose the display sometimes at 1333 setting. It appears to be random.

My RAM is G-Skill Ripjaws (2 sets of 2x4GB, F3-12800CL9D-4GBRL) with timing of 9-9-9-24-2N and Cas Latency of 9. The description at Newegg says, "...Ripjaws Series memory is designed specifically to complement Core i7 processors, the P55 Express Chipset..." I assumed, back when I put together my system, that the combination would synch perfectly since the i5 and i7 CPUs were talked about only in terms of the number of cores, not memory spec's.

I wandered over to OWC's memory page for the 2010 Mac Pro. Here's the memory characteristics: PC-8500 1066MHz DDR3 ECC SDRAM with CAS 7-7-7-20. Hmmm, maybe I'll try backing off the RAM to 1066MHz & see what happens. I've got nothing else to try.

BTW, this wake-up problem didn't occur for me didn't start until I upgraded to 10.6.5 and added the 2nd set of RAM. So, the issue could be our RAM if Mac OS X is expecting to see 1066MHz with CAS 7-7-7-20. However, I'm not convinced it's an OS issue because my Ubuntu and Win 7 exhibit the same problem.
 
Stork said:
ShavenYak said:
Interesting, I just found this thread yesterday: http://www.tonymacx86.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4647&hilit=bad+memory+sleep.

Hmmm, maybe I'll try backing off the RAM to 1066MHz & see what happens. I've got nothing else to try.

BTW, this wake-up problem didn't occur for me didn't start until I upgraded to 10.6.5 and added the 2nd set of RAM. So, the issue could be our RAM if Mac OS X is expecting to see 1066MHz with CAS 7-7-7-20. However, I'm not convinced it's an OS issue because my Ubuntu and Win 7 exhibit the same problem.

When 10.6.5 first came out there was an upgrade guide that warned about losing the USB mouse and keyboard. This is a type of cause which to me prioritizes a solution along these lines rather than mis-ordered or mismatched memory which would appear as defective.

Now that you've checked behavior with different OS's, look for that which affects all the OS's. You and OP have the same mainboards and while not OS per se, maybe there is a relationship between your mainboards and the kexts and drivers involved. I'm thinking out loud. But the OS have one thing in common, and that's the bios. When I first installed SL, I had to enable legacy USB support in Bios as I had no mouse or keyboard.

Another thing I've notices is that Hackintosh is not doing all that well, let's say it's still being polished, with USB 3.0 support, the Lacie thread. To me, more things are pointing to USB than Ram, though I suppose there could be two (or more) separate problems.

A benefit of having more than one OS installed for diagnostics is that you can tap the much larger user base of say Windows users with your mainboard, maybe a 90 to 1 deeper database to explore for solutions. I'm not saying the next idea is a solution, but worth trying because I don't surely know the available options in your Bios to be changed.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=10092819
"Re: Hibernate(s2disk) problem due to USB device?
Same problem with my mainboard ASUS M4A89GTD PRO USB3 on Ubuntu 10.10 (I do not use uswsusp instead, but included default packages).

Both suspend and hibernate tasks fail unless I disable USB 3 support in BIOS settings.

In addition : this is the referenced bug for the xhci module (eXtended Host Controller) that control the USB 3 interface
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+sour ... bug/522998 "
-----
And the previous post to the one above:
"As a follow up to this post, I later tried disabling the USB 3.0 controller in BIOS and lo! suspend to ram (sleep) worked!! Re-enabling the USB 3.0 controller recreated the original symptoms of appearing to suspend, but then "waking" immediately. So there appears to be a bug or problem for Linux Mint (Lucid) suspending USB 3.) controller. At least on this Gigabyte H57M-USB3 motherboard."

So your and these mainboards have in common USB3. I think since one is experiencing usb malfunctions, that is a better area to look at/suspect rather than RAM frequency. It can be pretty hard to predict what change will have what consequence, especially when the workings of some errant devices is off the beaten path; there is more weight of evidence surrounding USB and the Bios.
 
Well, the good news is my MB doesn't have USB 3.0, only USB 2.x & FW400.

On a hunch - I'm all out of other ideas - I disconnected my system from my KVM. But, it didn't wake-up in the stand alone mode. :thumbdown:

I got only one last thing to try, when I get ambitious, is to disconnect the internal Blu-ray ROM/DVD/CD drive to see if it's the proverbial optical drive issue (although this wasn't an issue before). I'm not in a hurry to stick my hand into the cramped CM Elite 341 case; maybe tomorrow.
 
I was confused, I thought both of you had USB3. That may be good news. I went to tom's hardware and discovered your MB doesn't support 1600 ram by default; quote and reply:

---------------
trale wrote: I have a new Core i7-860 build,
mobo=Gigabyte GA-P55M-UD2,
RAM = CORSAIR XMS3 4GB (2 x 2GB)DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800)
This ram supports Intel XMP (profile 1)

By default, the BIOS has XMP set to "Disabled", and the RAM frequency is 1333

I changed it to "Enabled", and I see that the RAM frequency is now at 1600, the advertised speed of the RAM.

Did I just overclock my system? Will this lower the stability of my system in any way or have any other effects?

Message quoted 1 times
Add a reply
Best answer from ekoostik
trale wrote :

Did I just overclock my system? Will this lower the stability of my system in any way or have any other effects?

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/26592 ... t-anything
mindless's explanation of XMP is right. However, the motherboard does consider this an overclock so there are some other adjustments you may want to make. I built a system with the same chip and motherboard. In my experience, turning XMP on causes gigabyte to translate a lot of settings that are Auto by default as Disabled, whereas with XMP off it treats these Auto settings as Enabled. In particular, the features that I found I 'lost' were related to Turbo and energy savings/sleep step. One of the big selling points of the i7 860 was the turbo mode so I definitely wanted this back!

After some easy changes to a few default settings in the BIOS, I was able to get XMP and Turbo working together. The changes I had to make in the BIOS were on the Advanced CPU Core Features page: continued ...

SH: I think you will find this thread interesting and a lot more fun than messing with your mobo. I have a Cooler Master Haf-932 which weighs 29 pounds and comes with 5 fans.

ekoostik also wrote:

I don't know that any of it has changed. 1600 is not officially supported by Intel with the 1156 socket so you cannot count on being able to "plug and play". But if you want to enable 1600, it may not be that difficult. Depends on a couple things. The most important is: which CPU did you buy?

pooh wrote: 01-07-2010 at 09:54:59 PM
i5 750

Reply to pooh
ekoostik 01-07-2010 at 10:04:27 PM

Ok, running RAM at 1600 MHz is not as easy with an i5 750 as with an i7 860 or 870.

By default the P55s run at a BCLK = 133, the system memory multiplier is 10x (10x133=1333MHz) and as an example the i7 860's CPU clock ratio (cpu multiplier) is 21x (21x133=~2.8GHz).

With an i7 860 you are allowed to up the memory multipler to 12x. An i5 750 cannot go higher than 10x. But these means at stock bclk the fastest you can set the RAM to is 12x133 = 1600MHz for an i7 860. While for the i5 750 the fastest you can set the RAM to is 10x133 = 1333MHz.
To get any faster you have to OC your CPU.

SH So there is some difference between the i5 and i7 cpus and memory capability.
The hounds have found the scent, Tally Ho the fox, meaning closer to your issue.
I saw your, @ 3.2
 
Thanks for the link. I've read it between plays in the Orange Bowl. However, the info is not sinking in now. So, I'll re-read tomorrow after my 2nd cup of coffee :D and edit this post with any results. BTW, I followed this post when I was OC's (I used Case 1): 3 Step Overclocking Guide – Lynnfield
 
You are welcome. The next link I think was written by a software engineer. He confirms that there is nothing automatic about getting memory which vendors say will work at 1600, to actually work at 1600; enabling XMP changes other settings in Bios, unless you use his install guide. Did you use XMP, was it available in your Bios (Profile 1)? There are enough steps that probably you did not enable 1600 properly and that could cause some kind of the symptoms. But then you reverted the ram speed to 1333 which is a default setting for ram with your MB and cpu. If this was done by changing XMP, then I think all the bios settings are supposed to revert after the next boot. I don't know how it works if you changed your memory settings manually. Anyway, if you changed your ram back to 1333, then the symptoms caused by improper enabling of 1600, you'd think they would disappear. ... if you properly reverted to 1333, then the problems you now have would not seem to be connected to ram speed. Since you did two things, upgraded to 10.6.5 and added two more sticks of ram, and troubleshooting works by isolating possible causes, would it be too cramped to remove the two newer sticks and see if it all works as well as before you upgraded to 10.6.5, with 10.6.5 now installed? The original instructions for 10.6.3 said not to install all of your ram, but 4GB iirc, and then add in the rest of the ram later, it was in a tonymac guide. I doubt if that is the problem. I followed the instructions the first time but at a later date I reinstalled from scratch and forgot to remove the 6GB of ram I added (to 6GB at first) and the reinstall went ok with 12GB of ram installed.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/27440 ... ing-tuning
part 4 of 4.
'Sidestepping' XMP's limitations:

"I don't know if this is an issue for most MOBOs, but, at least on GIGABYTES', enabling XMP - disables pretty much every other clocking and voltage adjustment! ^%$#! I've tried to come up with a slick way of conquering this, using the BIOS' CMOS parameter 'storage slots', but - it just ain't happening! Boils down to the fact that enabling XMP changes all the parameters instantaneously, rather that awaiting the next boot, as does disabling it - no way to 'get in between' to save the XMP memory parameters, without it being enabled, crippling everything else!

So - the 'clumsy workaround' (actually, only takes about five or eight minutes to 'dial-in')"

SH: And he presents his method. I provided this link to add evidence that this matter of getting the 1600 speed working is not at all automatic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top