Ok I ran memtest with each of the 4 memory modules individually, and they passed. I ran in dual channel mode and passed too. I ran with 3 of them, and pass. But when I run with all them 4 at the same time, it never passed..

Why would memtest return errors only when the 4 modules are installed?

Someone suggested me to reset the CMOS, unplug the power cable, and press the ON button for 10 seconds to drain the motherboard capacitors. I then did a system reboot, and could run with total stability for more than 2 hours, where I could do an antivirus scan, backup 40GB of files and browse videos on youtube.

Is it correct to affirm that if I could do that, then necessarily the processor or motherboard can't possibly be damaged?

I just reseated the heatsink, restarted and windows began to detect 4 cores again and I felt the system fast again as before.. But it crashed in only 3 minutes of use, it's freezing all the time.

How can I know accurately if the motherboard or the processor is damaged? I really don't want to spend money in a part which was really working, and find out that it was the other part that was defective. I really need to find what is wrong here.

After 2 years of flawless functioning, my system stopped to boot. I found that it was because the motherboard was shorting with some metal parts. Now it boots, but it is now freezing all the time, and windows is only detecting 2 cores from the Q6600 processor. In dxdiag menu, it says it is a Q6600 processor, with 2 CPUs... In CoreTemp, its menu shows that it is an E6600 (Conroe) processor.... and the system is sooo slow, it does not feel fast as before anymore.

What could be happening here? Why is the system only detecting 2 cores here?

System specs:

MSI P6N Diamond Motherboard

Q6600 Processor GO revision

GeForce GTS G92 video card

Thermaltake Toughpower 850watts SLI PSU

4x1GB Ram memory OCZ SLI-Ready Edition PC6400

No overclocking

The max temp I saw in CoreTemp before this issue was at 70 degrees celsius, since I switched to stock heatsink

[QUOTE="bandieramonte"]I have already tried uninstalling one video card from my system, and the problem still prevails. Please, does anybody know the solution to this issue?teardropmina

well, the only thing left I can think of is that your system needs some clean-ups. My last runthrough of the game was on my ultimate x64 rig, and the setup was pretty much the same as yours (4 core and 8800 series card).

And exactly what clean-ups do you mean? Can you please specify?

1. the vista hotfix needs to be 64 bit version

2. if already updated to vista sp1, that hotfix is not needed.

3. the newest nvidia driver isn't necessary the better, considering SLI performance. so it'd better try different recent driver and to see which one does better.

4. if all drivers are the same, uninstall the game, re-install it, apply patch and just use one card -- not just disabling SLI, pull one card out.

*SLI should be running The Witcher fine on Vista x64.

teardropmina

I forgot to say that I already have the SP1 for vista. I will try to see if the game works when pulling one video card out, because I already tried by disabling SLI on the Nvidia Control Panel and it did not worked out. Though, the game should work with SLI..

Hello all;

I got the following system:

Quad Core 6600

Two 8800 GTS G92's

4GB RAM OCZ SLI Ready Edition 4-4-4-15 PC 6400

Windows Vista Ultimate 64 Bits

I installed The Witcher. When I launch the game, the screen goes black as if the game is just about to start, but 2 seconds later, a message appears saying that the game stopped working. I press Ok on the dialog box and my desktop appears again.

Then I went to the game's website, to install the 1.3 patch. The website says that I first must install some vista hotfix and the latest video card drivers. When I go to install the hotfix, a dialog box appears saying that this update does not apply to my system. I then update the video card drivers to the most recent one. Then I install the 1.3 patch for The Witcher. Then, when I start the game, exactly the same thing happens than before installing the patch.

I don't know the fix to this problem. Please someone help me here.

Thanks a lot.

[QUOTE="bandieramonte"]

[QUOTE="Musa_007"]

When did an overcloked Q6600 beat an overclocked E8400 in crysis?:?

andyjl

You got the charts right here, didn't you see that the overclocked Q6600 outperformed the overclocked E8500 in almost all cases? But of course, I also said that the difference is marginal...

And no an E8400 at 4.2Ghz is substantially faster than a Q6600 at 3.4Ghz.However the problem is that most games are not that demanding on such powerful CPU's at stock let alone Oced so that's why you wont see much difference between Q6600@3.4 and E8400@4.2.The GPU is going to be the bottleneck with such speeds however there will be some games still which will need alot of CPU power and ofcourse there will be games in the future.

Musa_007

By the time that games will be even more CPU demanging, on that future that you're talking about, games will be utilizing the 4 cores more efficiently because the devs are beginning to focus more on the utilization of the 4 cores. By that time the performance gap between quads and dual will begin to be significantly felt.

If your talking about the charts I posted above, your looking at them wrong. Any difference of 2 FPS or less can be atributed to error and is meaningless, you can not state that the Q660 is better based on this. If you take all the tests together and find the average the OC E8400 beats the OC Q6600 but it is less than a 2 FPS difference so again its a tie.

These charts are actually bad for the Q6600 because Crysis was written to support quad core and even with that extra help, the Q6600 just catches up to the E8400.

Before continuing with this argument, I must first make an immediate important question: were those benchmarks taken in Windows XP or in Windows Vista? If it was on the later, was it on 32 bit or 64 bit?

Jeez that absolute 0.5fps difference your are talking about is pure conincidence and if you re run the benches it could be changed "cuz the GPU is the bottleneck there".By looking at the other results i am sure you would understand this but seems like you dont.

Do yourself a favour and run crysis GPU benchmark and you will get those marginal differences in EVERY different bench running the same hardware.

And did you not see what happens in medium settings and that in one of the benches the 3Ghz E8400 outperformed the 4.2Ghz E8400 by the same marginal difference because it is the GPU only which is giving those numbers.

Musa_007

You got a point there. But I still need to see the benchmark with exactly this system with a more powerful GPU where the later wont bottleneck. Care to show me one? It must have overclocked CPU's too.

And which other results are you talking about anyways?