BIOS 2745 for D975XBX2 Motherboard

Dandruff · Post by **Dandruff** » Mon May 21, 2007 11:21 pm

thank you!

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Tue May 22, 2007 10:53 am

D975XXB2 (Retail, 505) I'm running DDR2 800 ECC memory. The upgrade forced me to do BIOS recovery since it would no longer POST / beep / nothing. Intel support is spitting in my face and making life very hard for me. I find the support isn't finding solutions to the problems, and they take a long time to turn around and they don't escalate which causes massive frustration.

Since I live very close to Intel (same county), I plan on suing them for this in small claims court and want to know how others have fared when doing that. Its simple, I followed the rules on the data sheet and on the website, they say the memory isn't "qualified" despite it following the rules, and they need to pay for this.

Again, my D975XBX2 stopped posting / booting after this 2745 BIOS upgrade. Again, Intel basically is now laughing and spitting in my face because there are no "qualified" DDR2 800 ECC parts. And, Again, the real shocking culprit is that with 2692, the thing can pass memory tests all day long, run any OS, Linux 64 bit, Vista, you name it, and pass a battery of memory tests, even MemTest86+.

I'm beginning to think I would be better off with an Asus.

How many people here have had Intel support spit in their faces and not admit to their problems being their problems?

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Tue May 22, 2007 10:57 am

ubiquityman wrote:Doesn't work here.
rev 505 with QX6700 & 2GB ECC RAM.

I've tried unplugging EVERYTHING: USB, PS2, Video card, hard drives, DVDs, Floppy, etc.

Pulled out the battery and waited for a few hours with the power supply disconnected. No dice.

Did the same here.

Im getting that this issue is related to ECC memory.

Im furious at Intel at the moment, Ive had a case open for days. Prepare to hear your memory isnt good enough or some crap.

Be very aware the memory lists dont have 800MHZ ECC on them, despite the 975X supporting it.

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Tue May 22, 2007 10:58 am

Monk wrote:Just out of curiosity did you folks use the Express or ISO update?

If you used the Express, was it in Vista or XP?

I unplugged everything but the floppy and one memory stick, reset the CMOS by leaving the battery out for some time, cleared everything, and even used the BOIS recovery up to 2745. Nothing gets the thing to POST.

Thank goodness for the recovery jumper.
Too bad with Intel, you actually need it.

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Tue May 22, 2007 11:01 am

Dandruff wrote:yeah, anyone contacted intel? the email-support site for the XBX2 isn't working here!?

I contacted them. They are spitting in my face. Everyone here should open a ticket. The support agent there arrogantly said they are having no issues with 2745.

ubiquityman · Post by **ubiquityman** » Tue May 22, 2007 5:06 pm

I wouldn't get too excited.

My experience was very different. They appeared quite willing to help and were reasonably polite. Like I said, the person I spoke with on the phone recreated the problem, so they are working on a fix.

However, "the squeeky wheel gets the grease" so it probably doesn't hurt too much to open individual cases.

It appears the problem is not with a particular ECC memory, but with any ECC memory.

Why don't you just stick with version 2692 for now?
Was there something in 2745 that you were hoping for?

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Wed May 23, 2007 8:36 am

ubiquityman wrote:I wouldn't get too excited.

Was there something in 2745 that you were hoping for?

No, I'm back to 2692. I just hate when I find a bug super fast, recover from the failure by myself and then call Intel to basically do a job for them for free and help them make a better product and then get defecated on by support. I would prefer a pat on the back and a polite "thanks, well look into it and get back to you" rather than becoming the unwitting subject of a German ScheiÃŸe video.

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Wed May 23, 2007 9:49 am

I like how a BIOS which bricks motherboards for all ECC memory users is still up on Intel's website, death-BIOS 2745 is still up at 9PM, Wed 5/23/2007, Pacific.

Nice. Nice. Nice. Way to act in response to a total and complete failure - Keep on handing out the BIOS.

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Thu May 24, 2007 9:16 am

mickrussom wrote:I like how a BIOS which bricks motherboards for all ECC memory users is still up on Intel's website, death-BIOS 2745 is still up at 9PM, Wed 5/23/2007, Pacific.

Nice. Nice. Nice. Way to act in response to a total and complete failure - Keep on handing out the BIOS.

ECC Bricking Death-BIOS 2745 is still up 8PM, Wed 5/23/2007, Pacific. Good way to keep handing out a horrible BIOS build everyone with ECC is having problems with.

rbichamp · Post by **rbichamp** » Thu May 24, 2007 7:04 pm

ubiquityman wrote:My experience was very different. They appeared quite willing to help and were reasonably polite. Like I said, the person I spoke with on the phone recreated the problem, so they are working on a fix.

However, "the squeeky wheel gets the grease" so it probably doesn't hurt too much to open individual cases.

This was basically my experience when I called them. They were relatively nice and thanked me when I directed them to this thread (as proof that it's a not just an isolated case). Let's hope they address this soon.

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Fri May 25, 2007 11:20 am

rbichamp wrote:
ubiquityman wrote: This was basically my experience when I called them. They were relatively nice and thanked me when I directed them to this thread (as proof that it's a not just an isolated case). Let's hope they address this soon.

Do nice people leave a board-bricking BIOS up on the website days after being told? Its still there today, 10P, Pacific, Friday 5/25. You can be nice and still be a do nothing.

I need results on this issue. We shouldn't be thankful people will listen. I'll take DR HOUSE style abuse if they fix problems like he does.

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Fri May 25, 2007 11:29 am

Oh well lookee here:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/sho ... ?p=2196986

Another huge forum where ECC users are bricked with BIOS 2745.

And Intel has known this for over a week now, well over a week.

BlueMagic · Post by **BlueMagic** » Fri May 25, 2007 8:48 pm

mickrussom:

Thanks for the warning about BIOS 2745.
I too have exchanged e-mail with Intel and it's pretty sad.
My case was about the Marvell controller...but that's another story.

From what I've read on this forum, it seems phone support is a lot better
than Intel's e-mail support (if you can call it that).

I think Intel is devoting alot of their resources to their latest P35 chipset,
and less on ours (975 chipset).

Dandruff · Post by **Dandruff** » Sat May 26, 2007 12:52 am

BIOS Update 2747 out now. no new changelog.

anyone with ECC ram give it a try?

Dandruff · Post by **Dandruff** » Sat May 26, 2007 2:49 am

ok, tried it -> works

rbichamp · Post by **rbichamp** » Sat May 26, 2007 10:29 am

Dandruff wrote:ok, tried it -> works

Worked for me too. I used BX97520J.86A.2747.EB.EXE (from Vista 32).

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Sat May 26, 2007 12:04 pm

2747 fixed the no-boot with ECC memory

Im going to do a 3dmark and make sure this fix didnt cost any noticeable performance.

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Sat May 26, 2007 12:29 pm

mickrussom wrote:2747 fixed the no-boot with ECC memory

Im going to do a 3dmark and make sure this fix didnt cost any noticeable performance.

3DMark 2006 (1.1.0) comes out at 11163 on Vista32 with Nvidia Driver ForceWare 165.01 (8800GTX)

Looks like this new bios build inst regressive.

ubiquityman · Post by **ubiquityman** » Mon May 28, 2007 12:44 am

Yup. Works here too.
Overall, I thought it was reasonably quick response from Intel.

mickrussom · Post by **mickrussom** » Mon May 28, 2007 9:32 am

ubiquityman wrote:Overall, I thought it was reasonably quick response from Intel.

Don't scratch their back. I've been building systems for some time, and stuff like this is way out of the ordinary. Also, I was accused of using unsupported memory - some of the support team needs to focus on solving problems instead of being nasty to customers. The memory works perfectly. Notice also, Intel didn't test any 800MHZ memory with ECC. That's not very nice of them.

Also, try putting a storage controller in the 3rd PCIe slot (or the second), it wont work properly.

Also, try running windows 2003 SP2 and getting sound to work *at all* on this board, onboard audio or even an add-in X-Fi.

There are several issues I have that could be solved with BIOS fix-ups (I'm reasonably sure of it), but they don't really care even though this board is high end, people with massive amounts of memory and a QX6700 aren't entitled to PCIe HBAs for some reason.

Also, I did notice this BIOS wasn't a sub-licensed Phoenix or AMI or Award BIOS - and you can really tell - its bad.

Intel should stick to making CPUs and Chipsets, and pay the dang royalty for BIOS code so its not horrible for the customers.

The last time I was privy to Intel firmware code was EFI support on the Intel SE7520JR2. The EFI support / boot mode was pathetic. The BIOS, from Phoenix, was fine.

Also, I have to say, that Marvell controller is dangerous silicon and should have never been used. I'm sorely disappointed in Marvell and will never use anything made by them by choice if at all possible after seeing these horrible drivers and terrible BIOS.

Legit Reviews

BIOS 2745 for D975XBX2 Motherboard

Intel is spitting in my face on this issue.

Deadly ECC destorying MB bricking BIOS is still up.

Re: Deadly ECC destorying MB bricking BIOS is still up.

2747 fixed the no-boot with ECC memory

Re: 2747 fixed the no-boot with ECC memory