*****SANDYBRIDGE MOTHERBOARD CHIPSET ISSUE*****

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm possibly missing something here, but the advice on the store pages is to use SATA ports 0 and 1 only, not 2 through 5. This gives 2 ports useable out of 6 total.

But the motherboards actually have 8 ports, of which 4 are useable 6Gbps and 4 un-useable 3Gbps. So the advice should be to use SATA ports 0 through 3, not 4 through 7. This gives 4 ports useable out of 8 total.
 
D3lirious said:
I'm possibly missing something here, but the advice on the store pages is to use SATA ports 0 and 1 only, not 2 through 5. This gives 2 ports useable out of 6 total.

But the motherboards actually have 8 ports, of which 4 are useable 6Gbps and 4 un-useable 3Gbps. So the advice should be to use SATA ports 0 through 3, not 4 through 7. This gives 4 ports useable out of 8 total.
Click to expand...

i have 6 port's ..... 2 6gb 4 3gb and 2 Esata's on back of pc
 
Delirious, the chipset has 6 ports. If the board has more then it has extra ports. Extra ports are fine. It's quite common for motherboard makers to add on additional JMicron or Marvell ports. They're fine for eSata storage/backup or 2TB arrays full of porn or TV or whatever, but they're usually far worse than the real chipset ports for speed/IOPS.
 
Whilst I'm personally gutted to read the news just before ordering my new parts, it's a great shame people are venting their (understandable) frustrations with OCUK rather than Intel.

We all just need to be patient until the official response becomes clear.

Gibbo, Nath - glad you're taking the time to keep everyone informed with the manufacturers' updates as they happen.
 
Awahwah said:
In a bid to stop all the post about the same thing. I see a couple of options for P67 chipset owners:

1. Keep the kit and see how it all pans out (what I plan to do). Unless Gigabyte\Intel\OCUK manage to dodge a bullet, then 3 will be used

2. Buy a SATA PCI-E card if your overly worried.

3. Return the goods as under the pretext of "Not as Described" or "Fit for Purpose" for a full refund. I'm sure you could argue the whole kit (inc CPU and RAM) as it was bought as a system. OC may not like this option and I can understand that but the UK Stataurary rights are quite good for this kind of thing, plus it would be very difficult for any one to say that there's no fault regardless if the failure rate could be low or high.

So, please make your mind up and leave OC to talk to who they need to talk with,
Click to expand...

I did suggest a refund for customers who want to return there boards but i dont think o.c is happy with doing this.
 
The Halk said:
Delirious, the chipset has 6 ports. If the board has more then it has extra ports. Extra ports are fine. It's quite common for motherboard makers to add on additional JMicron or Marvell ports. They're fine for eSata storage/backup or 2TB arrays full of porn or TV or whatever, but they're usually far worse than the real chipset ports for speed/IOPS.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my mistake. I only pulled up the specs of a few Asus boards and, as most have 8 ports, assumed all did.

Still, it might be useful to add something to the product info advice. A lot of people (like myself initially) might think they only have two ports to use when they actually have 3 or 4.
 
Durzel said:
You really are quite a sad little man. I know your life revolves around this forum (100k posts in 8 years is staggering) but that's no excuse for belittling the genuine concerns of others.
Click to expand...

There are genuine concerns - which all of us SB owners have - and there is hysteria. Some people are acting as if it's a fatally critical flaw in the system which *will* cause major damage to a computer system. You and I both know this is not the case.

What I am trying to do is urge some perspective through the use of a little humour and nothing more. Some people found it amusing, obviously you got out of bed on the wrong side this morning.

This thread is full of people complaining at OcUK for an issue that so far they've received NO guidance from Intel on handling and which it's quite clear they are not to blame for. If attempting to bring perspective to these rants makes me a 'sad little man' then so be it.

I recognise its an issue - heck, I own a product which I will at some point in the future have to have replaced - but I dispute that it's quite as serious as some people seem to be working themselves up to beleive.

To be honest I'm suprised to see such a retort from a long standing regular whose posts I often respect. Surely you can take a step back and see whats going on with the whole SB issue - it's a mess, it's far from ideal but it isn't the end of the world nor is it a serious risk to everyones PC.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;18370380 said:
There are genuine concerns - which all of us SB owners have - and there is hysteria. Some people are acting as if it's a fatally critical flaw in the system which *will* cause major damage to a computer system. You and I both know this is not the case.

What I am trying to do is urge some perspective through the use of a little humour and nothing more. Some people found it amusing, obviously you got out of bed on the wrong side this morning.

This thread is full of people complaining at OcUK for an issue that so far they've received NO guidance from Intel on handling and which it's quite clear they are not to blame for. If attempting to bring perspective to these rants makes me a 'sad little man' then so be it.

I recognise its an issue - heck, I own a product which I will at some point in the future have to have replaced - but I dispute that it's quite as serious as some people seem to be working themselves up to beleive.

To be honest I'm suprised to see such a retort from a long standing regular whose posts I often respect. Surely you can take a step back and see whats going on with the whole SB issue - it's a mess, it's far from ideal but it isn't the end of the world nor is it a serious risk to everyones PC.
Click to expand...

like it :)
 
D3lirious said:
Yeah, my mistake. I only pulled up the specs of a few Asus boards and, as most have 8 ports, assumed all did.

Still, it might be useful to add something to the product info advice. A lot of people (like myself initially) might think they only have two ports to use when they actually have 3 or 4.
Click to expand...

The full specification tabs on the products details exactly how many SATA 3GB/s and 6GB/s ports there are.

Right its nearly midnight and I'm sick of sandybridge! Im off to bed!
 
I have a great car.... its really cheap, and you can map the ECU to give it over an extra 100 horses for free.

It drives great, and handles like a dream. But there is a problem...

there is a small chance that if you use the back seats.. the car may slow down a little bit or even stop... until you remove usage of said seats...

i dont care, I use the drivers seat up front... So im gonna get in the car and drive it just like I always do.. no need to panic. But if I find out that my car IS affected by this back seat issue. once everything has calmed down, I may pop in and get the car changed out. Why not ?

So im just gonna relax and enjoy my car :P
 
Not to have a dig at any one, but I did notice the other day that my Vertex 2e windows experience score was lower than usual around 7.0 from 7.6 irc, also some pretty basic stuff such as running exe's seem to be lagging a little, now im pretty sure both my ssd and my data storage drive were on the white sata connectors and only my dvdrom on on of the 3g black ones, will of course check this again later

Just wondering if that is the start of my degrading....

Also noticed on the MSI site http://www.msi.com/news-media/news/1175.html

Only suggesting using the marvell controllers?
 
[TW]Fox;18370380 said:
This thread is full of people complaining at OcUK for an issue that so far they've received NO guidance from Intel on handling ......
Click to expand...

Not strictly true I'm afraid.

Although OcUK may not have been instructed to stop selling Sandy Bridge motherboards, Intel has now told all its Partners that:

"As a result of the design issue recently identified with the Intel® 600 Series Chipset, we are recommending that system builders stop building and shipping systems based on this chipset until additional information becomes available."

These are their words not mine, and it would appear that so far OcUK have chosen to ignore this recommendation, which I find somewhat surprising.

I will leave others to draw their own conclusions from this.
 
Montala said:
Not strictly true I'm afraid.

Although OcUK may not have been instructed to stop selling Sandy Bridge motherboards, Intel has now told all its Partners that:

"As a result of the design issue recently identified with the Intel® 600 Series Chipset, we are recommending that system builders stop building and shipping systems based on this chipset until additional information becomes available."

These are their words not mine, and it would appear that so far OcUK have chosen to ignore this recommendation, which I find somewhat surprising.

I will leave others to draw their own conclusions from this.
Click to expand...

A load of BS yet again.

We have not been informed by Intel about anything of the sort.

Reading techpowerup and quoting it here doesn't really wash, so I would get your facts right.

My conclusion is that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom