haswell problems ssd and usb

Your links are broken. But:

automaton said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=hasw...ient=firefox-a
ssd problems
Click to expand...

This is an issue with older SSDs not being fully SATA compliant. Previous chipsets let them work anyway, but Haswell is much lower power than previous chipsets, so the tighter compliance is necessary. This is a fault of older SSDs, apparently 2010 or older, not of Haswell.

automaton said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=hasw...ed=0CCoQvwUoAA
usb problems
Click to expand...

The Haswell USB bug, which may cause some USB 3.0 devices (like thumb drives) to disappear when the PC is put on standby, will be fixed in upcoming revisions of Haswell motherboards. This is a pretty minor issue - not anything like the Sandy Bridge B2 SATA degradation bug.

Neither of these are worth forsaking Z87 for an eariler chipset.
 
Last edited:
thanks for replies
the fact that anyone has these issues isnt making me rush out to buy
 
evilsofa said:
This is an issue with older SSDs not being fully SATA compliant. Previous chipsets let them work anyway, but Haswell is much lower power than previous chipsets, so the tighter compliance is necessary. This is a fault of older SSDs, apparently 2010 or older, not of Haswell.
Click to expand...

These SSDs work on any other chipset, that makes this Haswells fault.
 
Spazturtle said:
These SSDs work on any other chipset, that makes this Haswells fault.
Click to expand...

If what he says is accurate, then its not. If you buy tired rated at 105mph and the other tires rated at 105mph can do 110 and yours blow at 106, would it not be your fault not the tires?
 
Romale23 said:
If what he says is accurate, then its not. If you buy tired rated at 105mph and the other tires rated at 105mph can do 110 and yours blow at 106, would it not be your fault not the tires?
Click to expand...

Why should people have to be ok with issues with only 1 chipset on SSD's when the previous PC or any other chipset works perfectly fine.

If anything Intel should fix this problems. It's even more bad PR for them when it comes to haswell.
 
Oh sure, SATA SSDs not being fully SATA compliant is totally Intel's fault. Wouldn't want to trouble peripheral manufacturers to follow a standard, now would we?
 
evilsofa said:
Oh sure, SATA SSDs not being fully SATA compliant is totally Intel's fault. Wouldn't want to trouble peripheral manufacturers to follow a standard, now would we?
Click to expand...

Well If it works on all prior Intel Chipsets, but not haswell.....who is to blame?

Older SSD's that worked before, or Intel for changing the way haswell works? Don't get me wrong. It is messed up that the SSD's arent fully compliant, but I mean who would of cared before Haswell came out?

Intel knows how to fix the problem, I mean it worked on all prior chipsets just fine.
 
I don't know what peculiarity made those SSD's work with previous chipsets, but Intel is under no obligation to implement SATA in a non-standard way just to make those broken SSD's work.

As for the USB problems, a complete non-issue.

I was running an AMD Phenom like the OP, but I came over to the dark side without resistance. The OP should too.
 
DASHlT said:
Well If it works on all prior Intel Chipsets, but not haswell.....who is to blame?

Older SSD's that worked before, or Intel for changing the way haswell works? Don't get me wrong. It is messed up that the SSD's arent fully compliant, but I mean who would of cared before Haswell came out?

Intel knows how to fix the problem, I mean it worked on all prior chipsets just fine.
Click to expand...

Let's create a very simplistic spec and scenario where I have some hardware which is told to sample a data bus every 5 seconds. The spec also states that the data on that bus must remain constant for 0.5 seconds after the defined interval to allow me time to capture the data.

In the past four generations of my receiver design, I was super efficient and had my design capture that data every 5 seconds on the mark. It's probably a good thing since the transmitter was transitioning his data every 5.2s and not at the agreed upon 5.5s mark.

That transmitter hasn't changed (old hardware), but my new design wants to take advantage of that 0.5 second extra window I'm given so I can user slower gates and save some power as a result. My new design ends up sampling 0.4 seconds after that 5 second mark.

While my design changes exposed a problem, how is this a fault of mine and something I should be expected to change? My receiver adheres to the defined spec, but the transmitter doesn't. Why even have a spec at that point?
 
Last edited:
DASHlT said:
Well If it works on all prior Intel Chipsets, but not haswell.....who is to blame?

Older SSD's that worked before, or Intel for changing the way haswell works? Don't get me wrong. It is messed up that the SSD's arent fully compliant, but I mean who would of cared before Haswell came out?

Intel knows how to fix the problem, I mean it worked on all prior chipsets just fine.
Click to expand...

I would say the non-compliant ssd manufacturer is to blame. It wouldn't discourage me at all from a new haswell build because you're not going to buy an old ssd to use with your new z87.
 
SSD was out of spec -- their fault. That doesn't mean Intel won't still take shit for it, though.
 
DASHlT said:
Well If it works on all prior Intel Chipsets, but not haswell.....who is to blame?

Older SSD's that worked before, or Intel for changing the way haswell works? Don't get me wrong. It is messed up that the SSD's arent fully compliant, but I mean who would of cared before Haswell came out?

Intel knows how to fix the problem, I mean it worked on all prior chipsets just fine.
Click to expand...


I'll bet my old original intel SSD works fine :)

As for USB3.0, im waiting for the C2 boards to hit the shelves before I purchase. Sounds like something that could drive me nuts in the future, although not a big deal to me right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top