only ports 2-5 from the intel SATA 3.0 controller are affected, the 2 SATA 6.0 ports from Intel and the 2 Marvel SATA 6.0 are safe.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Intel Chipset Design Error!!!
- Thread starter bezant
- Start date
only ports 2-5 from the intel SATA 3.0 controller are affected, the 2 SATA 6.0 ports from Intel and the 2 Marvel SATA 6.0 are safe.
griff30
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2000
- Messages
- 7,209
Bad Bad timming for Intel with AMD Bulldozer due around the corner.
I wonder if AMD is pushing things for a faster release now?
I wonder if AMD is pushing things for a faster release now?
Newegg pulled the CPU's from their store too. I am guessing it will lower prices. Intel still has all these CPU's that nobody is buying up, and I presume they will not stop production of the CPU's during all this so stock will build up. I think Sandy Bridge will launch again with a deluge of low priced CPU's. So that means there will be a surplus of CPU's and Intel says a shortage of the newly fixed Cedar Point chipsets till April. So after April there will be a real big push of cheap systems with cheap CPU's.
If I was a conspiracy theorist I would say Intel did this on purpose in order to have an excuse for flooding the market with low cost parts and giving AMD unfair competition. Well that's what AMD said about Intel's previously selling parts very cheaply and being unfair.
Depends in your situation. I have other computers I can use and I am still within my 30 days that I can get an exchange from Micro Center. I am keeping all my other parts and returning my motherboard Since there aren't any SB boards to exchange it with, they will have to give me store credit or my cash back.
The issue with the '94 Pentium was that some floating point divisions were incorrect at about the 4th significant digit. (IIRC) Most people (in 1994) didn't do calculations of that precision, but good luck trying to explain that to anybody on the phone. (Which I had to do. Hundreds of times.)They didn't even recall the flawed Pentium chips, but they recalled this chipset, but we're supposed to believe it's no big deal.
Intel is probably being ultra conservative here to avoid a similar backlash as the one that resulted from that fiasco.
This is EXACTLY why I don't run out and buy ANYTHING on launch.
Now you have tons of suspect boards with the only fix being an RMA.
I'd strongly suggest keeping a vigilant eye out for screamin'' deals on boards
with these chipsets in the next few months. Chances are they're going to dump
the RMA'd boards back into the channel at cut rate prices.
Now you have tons of suspect boards with the only fix being an RMA.
I'd strongly suggest keeping a vigilant eye out for screamin'' deals on boards
with these chipsets in the next few months. Chances are they're going to dump
the RMA'd boards back into the channel at cut rate prices.
This is EXACTLY why I don't run out and buy ANYTHING on launch.
Well, guess what we enjoyed more than you. Seriously, thats usually not great advice. Especially with cpu/motherboards.
Hopefully the shabby vendors are selling counterfeit x67 chipsets which don't have the flaw... ^-^
Falkentyne
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 1,868
Eh? This is different from the LOCK CMPXCHGHB(to memory) bug that would cause a hard lock? (aka F0 0F) circa 1997?
I FAINTLY remember something about floating point mumbo jumbo but I was 22 years old pounding away on my 486dx2/66 at that time....
This is an Intel problem, not a manufacturer or retailer problem.
As such, different rules apply.
Intel is the company that is both mandating and underwriting the return and replacement of the boards.
Whether the manufacturers handle the RMA/replacement process directly or work in conjunction with the retailers might vary with each brand, but they will be required to replace the boards.
CompMage
Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2003
- Messages
- 851
The real issue is.
How, if ever will the consumer be able to tell and confirm they don't have some of the bad-stock.
I know you're all thinking this so I'll be the one with the gun.
I hate to say this, but I think this just shot the chip-set in the foot for everything but major vendors. I know I will not risk another P67 / 1155 unless the manufacture can prove some how the new silicon is in the board.
How, if ever will the consumer be able to tell and confirm they don't have some of the bad-stock.
I know you're all thinking this so I'll be the one with the gun.
I hate to say this, but I think this just shot the chip-set in the foot for everything but major vendors. I know I will not risk another P67 / 1155 unless the manufacture can prove some how the new silicon is in the board.
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,594
The new chip will likely be a new stepping. Of course since the labeling will be under the heatsink, that may or may not help.
CheapAsianGamerGuy
n00b
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2011
- Messages
- 10
You've totally missed the boat if you have not comprehended the point that ALL silicon is suspect/bad. "100% Good" Silicon does not EXIST.
Suspect/Bad silicon will degrade over time and fail over enough time at high I/O loads. (5% failure rate at 1 year and 15% over 3 years at average load) on the SATA II ports ONLY.
If you are not using the SATA II ports, you will be UNAFFECTED.
ALL stock on the market is suspect and no longer being sold at major retailers. Expect Early Feb spin up for New silicon, and shortages from then until April, at best.
All hardware vendors will likely discontinue existing boards and go to new revision #'s/part #'s for existing parts when good silicon is finally available.
Who the hell would want to sell "suspect" part #'s?! You just proved the idiocy of trying to sell the same parts... nobody would buy them, they're all suspect!
Suspect/Bad silicon will degrade over time and fail over enough time at high I/O loads. (5% failure rate at 1 year and 15% over 3 years at average load) on the SATA II ports ONLY.
If you are not using the SATA II ports, you will be UNAFFECTED.
ALL stock on the market is suspect and no longer being sold at major retailers. Expect Early Feb spin up for New silicon, and shortages from then until April, at best.
All hardware vendors will likely discontinue existing boards and go to new revision #'s/part #'s for existing parts when good silicon is finally available.
Who the hell would want to sell "suspect" part #'s?! You just proved the idiocy of trying to sell the same parts... nobody would buy them, they're all suspect!
I love my setup, not worried about the SATAII issue that might show up since I will have Asus replace the board when the new ones are available. Untill then I will enjoy my 5Ghz+ setup and the gaming and all the other stuff I do.
Anandtech has already explained the issue. Intel was only able to replicate the issue by putting the MB into a hot box under extreme conditions which included over volting the chipset, all of this to speed up what may happen over a three year period. None of which any normal person would do to their system.
by Anand Lal Shimpi on 1/31/2011 6:05:00 PM
Posted in CPUs , Intel , Sandy Bridge , Recall
"I just got off the phone with Intels Steve Smith (VP and Director of Intel Client PC Operations and Enabling) and got some more detail on this mornings 6-series chipset/SATA bug.
The Problem
Cougar Point (Intels 6-series chipsets: H67/P67) has two sets of SATA ports: four that support 3Gbps operation, and two that support 6Gbps operation. Each set of ports requires its own PLL source.
The problem in the chipset was traced back to a transistor in the 3Gbps PLL clocking tree. The aforementioned transistor has a very thin gate oxide, which allows you to turn it on with a very low voltage. Unfortunately in this case Intel biased the transistor with too high of a voltage, resulting in higher than expected leakage current. Depending on the physical characteristics of the transistor the leakage current here can increase over time which can ultimately result in this failure on the 3Gbps ports. The fact that the 3Gbps and 6Gbps circuits have their own independent clocking trees is what ensures that this problem is limited to only ports 2 - 5 off the controller.
You can coax the problem out earlier by testing the PCH at increased voltage and temperature levels. By increasing one or both of these values you can simulate load over time and thats how the problem was initially discovered. Intel believes that any current issues users have with SATA performance/compatibility/reliability are likely unrelated to the hardware bug.
One fix for this type of a problem would be to scale down the voltage applied across the problematic transistor. In this case theres a much simpler option. The source of the problem is actually not even a key part of the 6-series chipset design, its remnant of an earlier design thats no longer needed. In our Sandy Bridge review I pointed out the fair amount of design reuse that was done in creating the 6-series chipset. The solution Intel has devised is to simply remove voltage to the transistor. The chip is functionally no different, but by permanently disabling the transistor the problem will never arise.
To make matters worse, the problem was inserted at the B-stepping of the 6-series chipsets. Earlier steppings (such as what we previewed last summer) didnt have the problem. Unfortunately for Intel, only B-stepping chipsets shipped to customers. Since the fix involves cutting off voltage to a transistor it will be fixed with a new spin of metal and youll get a new associated stepping (presumably C-stepping?).
While Steve wouldnt go into greater detail he kept mentioning that this bug was completely an oversight. It sounds to me like an engineer did something without thinking and this was the result. This is a bit different from my initial take on the problem. Intel originally characterized the issue as purely statistical, but the source sounds a lot more like a design problem rather than completely random chance.
Its Notta Recall
Intel has shipped around 8 million 6-series chipsets since the launch at CES. It also committed to setting aside $700 million to deal with the repair and replacement of any affected chipsets. That works out to be $87.50 per chipset if there are 8 million affected chipsets in the market, nearly the cost of an entire motherboard. Now the funds have to cover supplying the new chipset, bringing in the affected motherboard and repairing it or sending out a new one. Intel can eat the cost of the chipset, leaving the $87.50 for shipping, labor and time, as well as any other consideration Intel provides the OEM with (heres $5, dont hate us too much). At the end of the day it seems like enough money to handle the problem. However Intel was very careful to point out that this is not a full blown recall. The why is simple.
If you have a desktop system with six SATA ports driven off of P67/H67 chipset, theres a chance (at least 5%) that during normal use some of the 3Gbps ports will stop working over the course of 3 years. The longer you use the ports, the higher that percentage will be. If you fall into this category, chances are your motherboard manufacturer will set up some sort of an exchange where you get a fixed board. The motherboard manufacturer could simply desolder your 6-series chipset and replace it with a newer stepping if it wanted to be frugal.
If you have a notebook system with only two SATA ports however, the scenario is a little less clear. Notebooks dont have tons of storage bays and thus they dont always use all of the ports a chipset offers. If a notebook design only uses ports 0 & 1 off the chipset (the unaffected ports), then the end user would never encounter an issue and the notebook may not even be recalled. In fact, if there are notebook designs currently in the pipeline that only use ports 0 & 1 they may not be delayed by todays announcement. This is the only source of hope if youre looking for an unaffected release schedule for your dual-core SNB notebook.
Final Words
Intel maintains that Sandy Bridge CPUs are not affected, and current users are highly unlikely to encounter the issue even under heavy loads. So far Intel has only been able to document the issue after running extended testing at high temperatures (in a thermal chamber) and voltages. My recommendation is to try to only use ports 0 & 1 (the 6Gbps ports) on your 6-series motherboard until you get a replacement in place.
OEMs and motherboard manufacturers are going to be talking to Intel over the next week to figure out the next steps. Intel plans to deliver fixed silicon to its partners at the end of February, however itll still take time for the motherboard makers to turn those chips into products. I wouldnt expect replacements until March at the earliest.
I maintain that the best gesture of goodwill on Intels part would be to enable motherboard manufacturers to replace P67/H67 motherboards with Z68 boards for those users who want them."
We will just have to see how each manufacture decides to handle this, but I think they would be wise to do what Anand has suggested and offer full replacement regardless if the problem shows or not. It's to their benefit to offer the best possible customer service at Intel's expense.
Anandtech has already explained the issue. Intel was only able to replicate the issue by putting the MB into a hot box under extreme conditions which included over volting the chipset, all of this to speed up what may happen over a three year period. None of which any normal person would do to their system.
by Anand Lal Shimpi on 1/31/2011 6:05:00 PM
Posted in CPUs , Intel , Sandy Bridge , Recall
"I just got off the phone with Intels Steve Smith (VP and Director of Intel Client PC Operations and Enabling) and got some more detail on this mornings 6-series chipset/SATA bug.
The Problem
Cougar Point (Intels 6-series chipsets: H67/P67) has two sets of SATA ports: four that support 3Gbps operation, and two that support 6Gbps operation. Each set of ports requires its own PLL source.
The problem in the chipset was traced back to a transistor in the 3Gbps PLL clocking tree. The aforementioned transistor has a very thin gate oxide, which allows you to turn it on with a very low voltage. Unfortunately in this case Intel biased the transistor with too high of a voltage, resulting in higher than expected leakage current. Depending on the physical characteristics of the transistor the leakage current here can increase over time which can ultimately result in this failure on the 3Gbps ports. The fact that the 3Gbps and 6Gbps circuits have their own independent clocking trees is what ensures that this problem is limited to only ports 2 - 5 off the controller.
You can coax the problem out earlier by testing the PCH at increased voltage and temperature levels. By increasing one or both of these values you can simulate load over time and thats how the problem was initially discovered. Intel believes that any current issues users have with SATA performance/compatibility/reliability are likely unrelated to the hardware bug.
One fix for this type of a problem would be to scale down the voltage applied across the problematic transistor. In this case theres a much simpler option. The source of the problem is actually not even a key part of the 6-series chipset design, its remnant of an earlier design thats no longer needed. In our Sandy Bridge review I pointed out the fair amount of design reuse that was done in creating the 6-series chipset. The solution Intel has devised is to simply remove voltage to the transistor. The chip is functionally no different, but by permanently disabling the transistor the problem will never arise.
To make matters worse, the problem was inserted at the B-stepping of the 6-series chipsets. Earlier steppings (such as what we previewed last summer) didnt have the problem. Unfortunately for Intel, only B-stepping chipsets shipped to customers. Since the fix involves cutting off voltage to a transistor it will be fixed with a new spin of metal and youll get a new associated stepping (presumably C-stepping?).
While Steve wouldnt go into greater detail he kept mentioning that this bug was completely an oversight. It sounds to me like an engineer did something without thinking and this was the result. This is a bit different from my initial take on the problem. Intel originally characterized the issue as purely statistical, but the source sounds a lot more like a design problem rather than completely random chance.
Its Notta Recall
Intel has shipped around 8 million 6-series chipsets since the launch at CES. It also committed to setting aside $700 million to deal with the repair and replacement of any affected chipsets. That works out to be $87.50 per chipset if there are 8 million affected chipsets in the market, nearly the cost of an entire motherboard. Now the funds have to cover supplying the new chipset, bringing in the affected motherboard and repairing it or sending out a new one. Intel can eat the cost of the chipset, leaving the $87.50 for shipping, labor and time, as well as any other consideration Intel provides the OEM with (heres $5, dont hate us too much). At the end of the day it seems like enough money to handle the problem. However Intel was very careful to point out that this is not a full blown recall. The why is simple.
If you have a desktop system with six SATA ports driven off of P67/H67 chipset, theres a chance (at least 5%) that during normal use some of the 3Gbps ports will stop working over the course of 3 years. The longer you use the ports, the higher that percentage will be. If you fall into this category, chances are your motherboard manufacturer will set up some sort of an exchange where you get a fixed board. The motherboard manufacturer could simply desolder your 6-series chipset and replace it with a newer stepping if it wanted to be frugal.
If you have a notebook system with only two SATA ports however, the scenario is a little less clear. Notebooks dont have tons of storage bays and thus they dont always use all of the ports a chipset offers. If a notebook design only uses ports 0 & 1 off the chipset (the unaffected ports), then the end user would never encounter an issue and the notebook may not even be recalled. In fact, if there are notebook designs currently in the pipeline that only use ports 0 & 1 they may not be delayed by todays announcement. This is the only source of hope if youre looking for an unaffected release schedule for your dual-core SNB notebook.
Final Words
Intel maintains that Sandy Bridge CPUs are not affected, and current users are highly unlikely to encounter the issue even under heavy loads. So far Intel has only been able to document the issue after running extended testing at high temperatures (in a thermal chamber) and voltages. My recommendation is to try to only use ports 0 & 1 (the 6Gbps ports) on your 6-series motherboard until you get a replacement in place.
OEMs and motherboard manufacturers are going to be talking to Intel over the next week to figure out the next steps. Intel plans to deliver fixed silicon to its partners at the end of February, however itll still take time for the motherboard makers to turn those chips into products. I wouldnt expect replacements until March at the earliest.
I maintain that the best gesture of goodwill on Intels part would be to enable motherboard manufacturers to replace P67/H67 motherboards with Z68 boards for those users who want them."
We will just have to see how each manufacture decides to handle this, but I think they would be wise to do what Anand has suggested and offer full replacement regardless if the problem shows or not. It's to their benefit to offer the best possible customer service at Intel's expense.
Could this be a simple test??
Take a large data file, movie, zip, music, etc... Create an SFV/MD5 for it.
Copy it from hdd to another hdd and back again testing the sfv after its been copied to and from.
If theres errors, then you got a bad chipset failing.
I did this for an old motherboard that had sata issues... i started noticing that when i copied large files around they got corrupted. So i started this sfv checking and low and behold there was some kind of chipset issue that never got resolved.
Take a large data file, movie, zip, music, etc... Create an SFV/MD5 for it.
Copy it from hdd to another hdd and back again testing the sfv after its been copied to and from.
If theres errors, then you got a bad chipset failing.
I did this for an old motherboard that had sata issues... i started noticing that when i copied large files around they got corrupted. So i started this sfv checking and low and behold there was some kind of chipset issue that never got resolved.
ChronoDetector
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2008
- Messages
- 2,783
Your fucking kidding right, WTF Intel, just great, and I recently invested on this machine. Way to go, Intel. Hopefully this issue doesn't affect my UD7 board.
CheapAsianGamerGuy
n00b
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2011
- Messages
- 10
If it's a current gen 1155 socket, it's affected.
My Intel DH67CF Mini ITX board has 2 blue (6Gb SATA) ports 1 black (3Gb SATA) and 1 red (3Gb eSATA) port... So I think I'll stick with the board until the replacement is available then will change. Considering the 2 blue ports are one for my HD and one for the DVD. So lucky for me, my options where limited anyways! lol...
Thats very interesting and scary at the same time. A word of warning though. MS update is going to offer to update something called ACS-6XXX storage. Do not do this! It will render several key storage controllers and ethernet ports non functional! Warning! Danger!
Lost in Space! Warning! Intel! Danger!
Lost in Space! Warning! Intel! Danger!
rat
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2008
- Messages
- 4,915
You're suggesting that people stick with something until they start to have problems... problems in which hard drive corruption is a symptom.
There's no way of knowing if and when this kind of problem will result until you're already losing data. Because this is an issue that becomes more likely after prolonged use, the failure rate will eventually reach 100% due to the design defect.
The best thing to do now is to replace it all while it's still young and production isn't at full speed.
You also the guy who suggests that people just use the car and enjoy it when there's a vehicle recall? Just say that people "replace it down the road" when one of the symptoms is brake failure? Think about this when it comes to a system. Without brakes, a car is undrivable. Not being able to use a patform without hard drive corruption makes the system unusable.
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not really a valid test because the problem is one that due to the way the silicon was made, it is subject to potentially degrading over time. More so if you overvolt the chipset or your system runs hot (or in a hotter climate where you're heatsinks have a harder time keeping it cool.
It's all further confused by Intel's saying that the bad stuff started shipping on Jan9.. because that was the release date for Sandybridge, and a lot of the mobo manufacturers were producing stock (to have stuff to sell at release) prior to that date.. giving that date makes it sound like a P67 based mobo made in late december might be ok, when in fact it would be just as subject to the problem as any other. The Entire run of Cougar Point based silicon (6 series) is suffering from this problem. And a chip that tests out today may fail next week, or month, or year..
I'd also not put it past intel to have shaded their 5-15% numbers by taking into account all the users who might have only one 'disc' drive (dvd, bd, etc) and one HDU, (like most laptops and commercially produced desktops) and as long as those are on Sata 0 and 1, the user would be fine. For all we know we are looking at something that would have (under use) a 80% failure rate within the next three years, but Intel is saying that would only affect 5-15% of users because only a small number (e.g. NOT your arch-typical Arsian) would actually be using ports 2 and up.
I was about to put all of my computer parts into the cart at Newegg to purchase tomorrow. Noticed that there were no 1155 boards available. Stopped here to find out if something was wrong and...HELLO!
Guess I'll have to just buy the parts I was going to buy before the Sandybridge processor came out.
Guess I'll have to just buy the parts I was going to buy before the Sandybridge processor came out.
You need to come back to reality. Cars with peoples lives in them are no comparison to a hard drive in a pc.
That's like me saying you're the dude that was in the news saying his gas pedal was stuck and can't stop his prius, all the while his foot had it mashed to the floor.
Stop blowing it out of proportion.
nitrobass24
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - December 2009
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,465
FYI MC is doing refunds on opened SB CPUs
Except the issue is low performance, NOT corruption.
We don't have hard data from Intel as to what the failure rate will reach.. potentially it might be only 40% before the system was like 10 years old. And to repeat the failure mode is lower performance, not data corruption
Replace it with what??? there ARE no replacements (unless you return the ENTIRE system and get something 1st gen that will be lower performance and nearly the same price) if someone has a bad Motherboard they cannot get an immediate replacement, not for a month or two
If the issue was 'brakes' I'd say yeah, don't drive the car, or send it back and get something else. but the issue is closer to 'might accelerate a little slower than normal' And that's only if you have no way to avoid using the affected Sata ports. If you can use just ports 0 and 1, and/or ports on a different controller (marvell etc if your board has one) then you won't ever SEE the problem until you need those ports..
So I see no insanity in 'continue to use the board' otoh, I'd seek a replacement in a month or two after Intel gets the supplies out there so the manufacture have something to replace your board with, rather than wait to see if /when it causes you an issue. Exception to that would be if your system is something like a laptop with only a single internal drive bay and single media drive.. in that case as long as those are on sata ports 0 and 1, you are good to go
Last edited:
night_2004
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 31, 2007
- Messages
- 2,229
Spoke with NewEgg's RMA department today about it, and they said that once they have a game plan they will be emailing all NewEgg customers that bought SB parts. They said that they will be taking care of this for us, so chances are they'll probably RMA your board as soon as they have replacements.
A few months down the line, once the defect is fixed, I'll probably ask them to refund and get Z68 if that's an option. But at a minimum I know they'll be replacing the board for a new P8P67 Deluxe when the time comes. I'm not going to accept a refurb, I know that much.
Intel said 'degraded performance' based on a clock signal degradation. That will eventually cause the drive to drop out. Bad for RAID0, bad for RAID5, and bad for RAID1. Bad for single drives too. You don't know if that will cause data corruption over time, and nothing that Intel has said indicates that your data is actually safe. Yes, 15% over a few years...but that is an off-the-napkin estimate and Intel has no f'ing clue how bad it will be in a few years. Even if that is accurate, we're talking something around 5%/year on average.
A few months down the line, once the defect is fixed, I'll probably ask them to refund and get Z68 if that's an option. But at a minimum I know they'll be replacing the board for a new P8P67 Deluxe when the time comes. I'm not going to accept a refurb, I know that much.
Intel said 'degraded performance' based on a clock signal degradation. That will eventually cause the drive to drop out. Bad for RAID0, bad for RAID5, and bad for RAID1. Bad for single drives too. You don't know if that will cause data corruption over time, and nothing that Intel has said indicates that your data is actually safe. Yes, 15% over a few years...but that is an off-the-napkin estimate and Intel has no f'ing clue how bad it will be in a few years. Even if that is accurate, we're talking something around 5%/year on average.
Well, I just moved my SSD drive to a 6GB port.. It's time to move on IMO. Not going to take everything apart..
I would suggest to hold on this, unless you have a system that you can use it. It's gonna be a while till everything settles. If ASUS doesn't replace the defective product with a new one, then I am just gonna buy the Intel MB and call it a day. Simple as that.
I would suggest to hold on this, unless you have a system that you can use it. It's gonna be a while till everything settles. If ASUS doesn't replace the defective product with a new one, then I am just gonna buy the Intel MB and call it a day. Simple as that.
Stereodude
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2000
- Messages
- 3,285
This isn't going to be helped by the fact that Intel drops this right at the start of Chinese New Year and all the offices in Taiwan are closed for a week.
They will just make a new revision to the motherboard - so rev 1.0 will be bad, but rev 1.1 will be good. I seriously doubt they will try to retrofit new chipsets onto old motherboards.
Except the issue isn't corruption, it is performance. It'll get CRC errors, which the chipset will try to correct, which will cause slow performance, but it won't corrupt the data so an MD5 check won't see it.
night_2004
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 31, 2007
- Messages
- 2,229
It would be nice if there was a way to monitor the bit error rates on the ports, so that some of us who are stuck with P67 boards and have too many SATA drives can at least know if they need to start thinking about switching cables around to unused ports to try and get a little more life out of the board.
It's looking like April might be the earliest timeframe for replacements...
Too bad Intel doesn't have a RAID card that is compatible with their current RAID offerings (do they?) as that would be a suitable stopgap for some of us.
It's looking like April might be the earliest timeframe for replacements...
Too bad Intel doesn't have a RAID card that is compatible with their current RAID offerings (do they?) as that would be a suitable stopgap for some of us.
For anyone above saying I posted bad advice about keeping and using the board until I have problems I'll do just that. I bought a $100 board, enjoying it now and will enjoy it for a long time to come. If you have important data that you don't want to lose, its your job to back it up using multiple methods. Always expect your drives to die, then if they do, you're already covered.
Like utnorris said, he's enjoying his SB setup, I'm enjoying mine. If you want to send it back, go for it, but you'll go without it for at least a few months, all while I'll be enjoying mine then probably replacing it when X68 comes out. I have the luxury of having multiple setups and a lot of flexibility, so if it dies I won't be broken hearted.
I'm actually really curious to see if this board will fail or if I'll suffer the symptoms of a failing SATA controller. Only time will tell and until then I'll call this board a Special Edition.
Like utnorris said, he's enjoying his SB setup, I'm enjoying mine. If you want to send it back, go for it, but you'll go without it for at least a few months, all while I'll be enjoying mine then probably replacing it when X68 comes out. I have the luxury of having multiple setups and a lot of flexibility, so if it dies I won't be broken hearted.
I'm actually really curious to see if this board will fail or if I'll suffer the symptoms of a failing SATA controller. Only time will tell and until then I'll call this board a Special Edition.
This is disappointing, but I just moved my hard drives (40gb intel ssd and 1tb samsung f3) to the SATA III inputs. I have my optical drive on SATA II, but I do not need to use it much (I was planning on building this computer mostly to play games bought on Steam and for ripping my cds to my computer). But that will have to wait now (I have a laptop, but I killed the cd drive in it due to heat when ripping the cds).
I usually am not an early adopter, but since it was the 2nd generation i core I figured it would be safer. I have been on a laptop for 4 years now and really wanted a desktop.
It was hard enough installing my motherboard in my case with the Thermalright Silver Arrow installed. It will definitely be an adventure having to remove (hopefully I do not mess up, since it seems tricky).
I am planning on using the system until replacement boards are available if that is an option.
I usually am not an early adopter, but since it was the 2nd generation i core I figured it would be safer. I have been on a laptop for 4 years now and really wanted a desktop.
It was hard enough installing my motherboard in my case with the Thermalright Silver Arrow installed. It will definitely be an adventure having to remove (hopefully I do not mess up, since it seems tricky).
I am planning on using the system until replacement boards are available if that is an option.
BlueMonster
n00b
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2011
- Messages
- 31
Ya from what I read... they are not recalling anything. only correcting the issue and allowing manufacturers to 'fix' how they see fit.
night_2004
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 31, 2007
- Messages
- 2,229
Haha...just crossed my mind that I'm going to have a pain of a time with the backplate for my H50. Gonna have to find identical 3M tape when I go to replace the board.
N2OInferno
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2009
- Messages
- 463
I was going to upgrade to SB very soon. Guess the timing on this is kinda lucky for me. I still will, it'll just be a bit of a wait is all.