[H] Striker? Evga RMA Quad question!

Discussion in 'Motherboards' started by Kibosh, Mar 13, 2007.

  1. Kibosh

    Kibosh [H]Lite

    Messages:
    104
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Hey guy's

    Now before I go shouting against Asus, I'll better be sure what is exactly going on.
    I've read that the owners of a quad-core can RMA their EVGA board because of problems with the FSB. That is a fact!

    I know also there is a new revision off the Asus Striker Extreme that also affects overclocking. That's true also!

    But what I don't know, if this should concurn me. I'm running a quad-core on the Asus Striker Extreme. If there really is a problem with the Striker, I want to know about it. Now getting my board replaced by Asus is wishfull thinking of course. But still, if it is the same error on those two boards, and EVGA RMA's them and Asus don't. It says a lot about Asus. And things like that should be thrown in the open, as it is the only power we have against big company's like that.

    But first off, before starting to shout out. (hmm, did already a little of that). Is it the same error on the 2 boards? Can someone check it? I have no clue about things like that. It sounds the same, but is it really?
     
  2. leeghoofd

    leeghoofd Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    465
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    there's no error , just the fsb of the Striker is stuck around 333fsb but since you got a 6700you can change multiplier to get higher in case you had a Q6600 then you would be stuck at max 3ghz. I don't know if a future bios update can solve this, just wait and see.

    Where did you get the confirmation there a new Striker revision out there that has better overclocking ? only thing I know about boards made in Japan and Taiwan , where the taiwanese version needs higher voltage to get the same overclocks...:mad:
     
  3. Kibosh

    Kibosh [H]Lite

    Messages:
    104
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Here you go. All info can be found in that thread. Some review sites discovered it I guess.

    A not frome one site:
    According to the latest information, there exist at least two revisions of the ASUS Striker Extreme motherboard: 1.00G and 1.03. And we tested the motherboard of the first revision:
    But owners of motherboards with revision 1.03 report there are no issues in overclocking up to FSB=500 MHz and higher МГц with neither Conroe not Allendale processors. That is, we arrive at the simple conclusion - unless the new BIOS versions raise the overclocking capability, then only revision 1.03 should be bought. Most likely, version 1.00G is only in motherboards of the very fist batches ("for the press"), but the retail shops will receive "normal" revisions. In any case, take care!


    You say the FSB get stucked on 333MHz. And you say nothing is wrong? I'm sorry but this board should easely do more!

    PS: I have rev 1.00G
     
  4. worthIT

    worthIT Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    140
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    We ALL do... I haven't seen a board that is 1.03 yet..

    ...and I agree with what you said - there's no chance in hell we are getting replacement boards from Asus. I'm rather annoyed at the whole thing. Having to use only 2 of my 4GB of RAM just cause they can't get their act together really pushed me over the edge.

    I think I might turn into the next crash[man] and just let loose on [H]ard|Forum!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:
    ...That will definitely fix all my problems! :p
     
  5. leeghoofd

    leeghoofd Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    465
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Mmm I wanna see a real review on that matter, not just forum posts, I have had my Striker up to 475Mhz but the NB needed more cooling than the crappy heatpipe could deliver, maybe with my watercooling gear it will work, 453mhz is no issue ( 450 has a hole is a no booter ) with my 1.00G and the normal heatpipe.

    Well let's cross our fingers that Asus has a) a bios update that can fix quadcore overclocks or b) RMA's some users with a new revision if all that is true....

    If it 's correct and they release a NB chipset with looser latencies ( a la 965) then it could indeed mean higher overclocks but lesser performance at the same clock speeds...

    Only thing we can do is to wait or sell the board...
     
  6. Kibosh

    Kibosh [H]Lite

    Messages:
    104
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    About it being true, I think you can believe it. It's true.
    The bios is hopely coming, but I'm afraid it wont solve the issue seeing they revised the board for a reason and did a hardware adjustment.
    About some getting a new one? Forget it or you should start a war against Asus. But who has the money.

    So why this post then. To get attention about it. So many people can learn about those company's.

    And there is the fact that I want to know what it is just, that EVGA RMA the boards (the way it should be) and Asus doesn't. Is it the same error on the mobo or not? I don't have the resources to find out, and I'm hoping someone here on the forum can.
     
  7. jmackay

    jmackay 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,929
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
  8. Kibosh

    Kibosh [H]Lite

    Messages:
    104
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    There you go, I guess it's true. Are Abit doing a RMA or is EVGA the only honest company out there?

    PS: When I try to do those modding myself, I'll end up with some death circuitboard
     
  9. jmackay

    jmackay 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,929
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    Yeah I wouldn't recommend doing it yourself. Just posted for those crazy brave souls ;)