mttc wrote:
> On Jul 3, 12:08 am, Paul <nos...@needed.com> wrote:
>> mttc wrote:
>>> On Jul 2, 4:55 am, Paul <nos...@needed.com> wrote:
>>>> mttc wrote:
>>>>> Gigabyte EX58-UD4 Board, Clean XP SP3, disconnect from network.
>>>>> When I play mp3 with Microsoft MediaPlayer, the XPclockstartlagged
>>>>> about 3 sec per Minute! This happen only if EasyTune tools is also
>>>>> running (Gigabyte board tune tool).
>>>>> I try to play with VLC, and I not see anylagged.
>>>>> I try it again on win7 clean install and I got the same. I try also to
>>>>> replace the Power Supply or use with one Stick of memory. but all the
>>>>> same.
>>>>> Any Idea please?
>>>> Pretty simple. Stop using EasyTune.
>>>> A potential mechanism to screw up a systemclock,
>>>> is described here.
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Management_Mode
>>>> "and causeclockticks to get lost"
>>>> Just a guess,
>>>> Paul
>>> Did you mean that ET6 run on System Management Mode?
>>> Did this Explain why I gotClockslow also after Sis Sandra BanchMark?
>>> why Sandra not cause me Lag on other boards systems?
>>> Thenks
>> To make the WinXP system timeclockrun slow, you need a mechanism which
>> causesclocktick interrupts to get lost. If the interrupt service
>> routine doesn't get to run in time, that is a mechanism.
>>
>> Clocktick interrupts come from hardware, many times a second.
>> That particular interrupt has a high priority, and in a normal
>> system, no other activity would prevent the interrupt from being
>> serviced. To explain a slow runningclock(where the time loss is
>> larger than can be explained by the accuracy of the quartz oscillator),
>> you need a mechanism which causes the loss ofclocktick interrupts.
>>
>> Software activity at the kernel level, works with sets of rules.
>> Such as not running at interrupt level for long period of time
>> and the like. (The hardware drivers added to the system, also have
>> to follow the rules.) If there was a problem with the design of the
>> OS itself, then time loss would be seen by many users.
>>
>> There have been cases, where the problem is caused by a hardware
>> bug. For example, some motherboards with Nforce2 chipset, have
>> trouble with time keeping. The problem was only evident, when
>> some of the boards were overclocked (non-canonical operating
>> frequency for the chipset). The bug may have been in the
>> interrupt logic.
>>
>> If you see the problem, with both WinXP and with Win7, that
>> tends to suggest there must be a hardware or driver component
>> to this problem.
>>
>> You have a function in the BIOS called HPET, and you could
>> try disabling that for a test. I don't know why that would be
>> a problem, but it is all I can see that might be related,
>> in the BIOS.
>>
>> http://web.archive.org/web/200407290...crosoft.com/wh...
>>
>> Paul
>
> I disable HPET Support on BOIS. the I boot XP again and I run EsyTune
> (Gigabyte board tune tool). I not open any other App (no need to rum
> also the MediaPlayer). the Clock Start Lagged. I not underspend what
> cause that difference.
>
> I not get any clue from Gigabyte that have known issues about EasyTune
> with this board. Also I ask Sis Sandra, they answer me:
>
>>> Sandra does not use SMM, at least not on purpose.
>>> It is possible that by the OS calls it makes for SMM to be triggered - at least by what the article says - in >>any case it should not happen that clock is lagging.
>>> If updating the BIOS and resetting to defaults did not fix it, what other choice is there but replacing the >>board?
>
>
Well, the basic mechanism for the system time to run slow, is known.
It has to do with interference with the clock tick interrupt and
its servicing. So you'd be looking for a mechanism that could do that.
It isn't exactly going to be easy to figure out, unless you happen
on the solution by accident. (I don't know enough of the details
of the various mechanisms, to help further.)
The existence of SMI and SMM, was enough for these users to attempt
to change the settings. The software they want to run, is real-time,
and interference is unacceptable. So they attempted to disable SMI,
as a means to prevent any interruptions of real-time operation.
The BIOS can lock the controls on SMI (SMI_Lock bit), to prevent
a potential security issue. And that might mean, that any defined
mechanism, cannot be changed while the OS is running.
http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentr...exchange/18832
*******
Just out of curiosity, there is another parameter you may wish to
evaluate on your Gigabyte motherboard. That is DPC latency.
http://forums.anandtech.com/messagev...readid=2182171
http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml
There is nothing wrong with DPCs. A DPC is a deferred procedure call,
a way of scheduling interrupt handler work, to run at user level. That
shortens the time spend at interrupt level. The DPC Latency Checker
tool, measures the response time for the DPCs to get services. (So
a DPC is added to the queue, and the latency checker records how
long it took before it was serviced. Too long a latency, affect
sound playback for example.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_Procedure_Call
On my cheap motherboard with Core2 Duo processor, I can run the DPC Latency
Checker. Currently, I have a 3D game, running in the background as a load.
The DPC Latency Checker, shows green bars, having a height of no greater than
about 250 microseconds. If I actually enter the game (with alt-tab), the
latency goes up to about 800 microseconds. But the bars are still green,
implying the responsiveness of the computer is not affected significantly.
You might try running the DPC Latency Checker, and see if you also have
a problem with that. If you have an interrupt problem, it may also reflect
itself in excessive DPC latency.
Paul
Similar Threads
