// #eevblog — 2019-01-04
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
01:24:16 Quit: hsn ([email protected]) Ping timeout: 121 seconds
01:25:08 Join: derek_ ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
01:45:19 Join: WebChatUser ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
01:46:45 Quit: WebChatUser ([email protected]) Quit: AustNet Chat Network - WebIRC
01:55:36 Join: coppice ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
01:55:46 Mode: (by ChanOP) +o coppice
01:56:44 Quit: coppice_ ([email protected]) Ping timeout: 121 seconds
02:09:13 Join: hsn ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
02:34:48 Quit: AndrevS ([email protected]) Connection closed
03:21:13 Quit: hsn ([email protected]) Ping timeout: 121 seconds
03:29:58 <Ampera> If someone sent me something all day yesterday and today, I didn't see it, and am too lazy to look at my ZNC logs
03:30:17 <Ampera> I wasn't monitoring messages during then, was tinkering with my machine to get my HTC Vive going
03:42:01 <rust_collector> great! then you won't be THAT angry
04:25:14 <aram> "New Horizons is a mere few billion miles/km away, while financial matters these days sometimes involve trillions [of dollars]"
04:25:17 <aram> hahahhaa
04:25:19 <aram> this startup dude is trying to "explain" why financial accounting is more difficult than flying a spacecraft outside the solaris system.
04:59:31 <DHess_US> He's right because physics and math do not lie.
05:03:41 <DHess_US> So apparently disabling hyperthreading on my Intel i7-870 stopped my Windows 10 test system from crashing. I checked and as far as I can tell the processor is completely supported.
05:14:31 <coppice> its a long time since I heard of hyperthreading related quirks. Maybe its a BIOS issue in your case. Does the BIOS explicitly support the processor?
05:16:48 Join: coppice_ ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
05:16:48 Mode: (by ChanOP) +o coppice_
05:19:15 Quit: coppice ([email protected]) Ping timeout: 121 seconds
05:35:39 <DHess_US> I did update the BIOS for better RAID support but yes, the CPU is fully supported by the MB. Obivously bein gan i870 it is many years old.
05:36:47 <DHess_US> I'll double check it.
05:38:35 <DHess_US> Yep, supported at the very beginning and perhapse on every BIOS.
05:41:26 <DHess_US> I've never before run into an OS problem which was solved by disabling HT.
05:44:15 <coppice_> in the early days of HT there were lots of OS related problems. I thought they went away with the i7, though
05:47:11 <DHess_US> I never had any problems with my P4 2.4C which was the first series of HT processors.
05:47:46 <DHess_US> There *have* been some recent Intel processors with HT related crashes which required a microcode update but nothing I could find for an old i870.
05:48:25 <coppice_> That's strange, because that P4 2.4GHz and its Xeon equivalent had a LOT of HT issues
05:48:28 <DHess_US> If I severly underclock the processor but leave HT on, then it takes about a week to crash. Full speed with HT crashes in a day or two.
05:48:52 <DHess_US> I just never ran into them then. Things were just single core then.
05:50:34 <coppice_> If speed changes your issue it might have nothing to do with HT. HT complicates the memory access pattern, and that can show up various quirky memory biss issues.
05:51:35 <coppice_> do you have all the memory slots filled? Lots of motherboards really don't like that
05:52:16 <DHess_US> Just half of memory filled. When I said underclocked, I included the memory.
05:52:59 <DHess_US> It behaved the same way when I had only 1 DIMM installed and before I changed the GPU.
05:54:52 <DHess_US> At this point I'm thinking bad CPU but if disabling HT fixes it that is fine with me.
05:57:23 Join: Guest|66408 ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
05:58:21 Quit: Guest|66408 ([email protected]) Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client
06:11:44 <DHess_US> I thought it might have to do with the processor with a base frequency of 2.93 overclocking to 3.2 with all cores full but I couldn't find anyway to disable that feature except to change the multiplier.
06:11:57 <DHess_US> But it ends up that apparently didn't have anything to do with it.
06:13:04 <Ampera> you talking about turbo boost?
06:13:18 <Ampera> because then that's by design.
06:13:38 <DHess_US> Yes, but I didn't know it overclocked even with all 4 cores at 100%.
06:13:46 <Ampera> why not?
06:13:48 <DHess_US> And I couldn't find anything in the BIOS to disable it.
06:13:55 <Ampera> it does that when thermals and power is optimal
06:14:08 <Ampera> my BIOS can completely disable turbo boosting.
06:14:17 <Ampera> and it's technically already disabled, because I overclock.
06:15:15 <DHess_US> CPU cors at 45C under full load and drawing 78 watts of the 95 spec.
06:15:38 <DHess_US> I replaced the stock cooler with something massively overdone.
06:16:47 <DHess_US> GPU temp is 22 but I'm not using it to do anything.
06:16:48 <Ampera> man, you're gonna make me install ITU, aren't you
06:16:56 <Ampera> *XTU
06:17:08 <DHess_US> ITU? XTU? I'm just using CPUID HWMonitor atm.
06:17:24 <Ampera> Intel's own CPU monitoring and clock adjustment program.
06:17:28 <DHess_US> It's been a few years since I built a new system so I have to catch up on the various utilities.
06:17:38 <DHess_US> Oh, that could be handy maybe.
06:17:40 <Ampera> XTU has been a thing for years and years
06:17:51 <Ampera> idk exactly how old it is, lemme see if I can find out.
06:17:58 <DHess_US> I haven't built an Intel system since, um, my P4 2.4C.
06:18:28 <Ampera> This is actually my first Intel system I've ever built, before I was on AMD APUs, because I had no money
06:19:15 <DHess_US> I dropped Intel after the Pentium 4 with 875P chipset because Intel stopped supporting ECC on anything except server systems. They still charge more than 2x the price for the CPU and MB for it.
06:19:55 <DHess_US> Back when I build my Phenom II 940, the Intel premium for ECC was $1200 because they only supported FB-DIMMs on XEONs.
06:20:22 <DHess_US> The difference payed for hardware RAID and 4 x 750G drives.
06:20:28 <Ampera> I've never personally noticed an issue between ECC and non-ECC, and while I know there is one, otherwise people wouldn't be going on about it, I've never felt I needed it.
06:21:04 <DHess_US> All of my old ECC systems going back to my P3 Tulani still run. Most of my non-ECC systems are dead.
06:21:18 <Ampera> my max freq right now is 4.5Ghz, although I think I set it so that if half the cores are running, it can do 4.6
06:21:34 <DHess_US> Of course all of those non-ECC systems were nVidia nForce2 chipsets so maybe that explains them failing.
06:21:51 <Ampera> Funny thing about my setup is I am using both my IGPU and dedicated GPU
06:22:19 <DHess_US> The MB is an Asus P7P55D-E Pro which has all kinds of gaming features like overclock tuning but I haven't mess with that part. I just wanted it running stable.
06:23:18 <DHess_US> Hmm, I don't think the XTU supports a processor this oldl.
06:23:48 <Ampera> try it, worst case it doesn't
06:23:59 <Ampera> but idk, I honestly would just use Linux when NT starts being unstable.
06:24:11 <DHess_US> Doing that. If you hear about a detonation in the central US, that was me.
06:24:34 <Ampera> you overclocking?
06:24:39 <DHess_US> Nope
06:24:47 <Ampera> why would linux detonate your PC
06:24:49 <DHess_US> And not underclocking because that didn't help.
06:25:05 <DHess_US> This system is ultimately going to be for someone else. For me it is just a Windows 10 test system.
06:25:06 <Ampera> oh you mean XTU
06:26:00 <DHess_US> So far I don't particularly like Windows 10. It is better than Windows 7 but that isn't saying much.
06:26:15 <DHess_US> Bah. Have to restart system to use it. That will have to wait until later.
06:26:37 <Ampera> don't have to
06:26:38 <Ampera> I didn't
06:26:56 <Ampera> I'm currently on Server 2016 to use VR stuff, which may or may not work on Linux.
06:27:42 <DHess_US> Seems to be working
06:29:07 <Ampera> that allows you to see how much power it's using, how fast different parts of it are going, run a benchmark/stress test, other things.
06:29:29 <DHess_US> It doesn't show power.
06:30:42 Join: Dakana123 ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
06:30:56 <Ampera> shows mine is using around 25w at idle
06:31:05 <Ampera> but it could just be what sensors are on the board/chip
06:31:15 <DHess_US> yep
06:32:13 <DHess_US> But it looks like it will let me disable turbo boost. Unfortuantely I have determined that turbo boost isn't the problem.
06:33:08 <Ampera> 133W full OC'd tilt on my 4790k
06:33:44 <Ampera> 4.5ghz all cores, I could bring it to 4.6, maybe even 4.7 if I wanted to, but I don't feel like crashing rn
06:36:16 <DHess_US> Next time I have the system down, I'll run the autotune stuff in the bios and see what it reports.
06:50:46 <Halcyon> Morning all
06:50:52 <Halcyon> Can't stop, going to work, just saying hi
06:57:52 <rust_collector> hi
06:59:54 <rust_collector> that is how you just say hi
07:01:08 <rust_collector> I am looking at a maybe used 3d printer... It is small, and looks pretty crap, but cute, and I don't know anything about 3dprinting.
07:01:36 <rust_collector> It is cheap, if it works, takes up little space...
07:02:45 <rust_collector> Is there anything I have to look out for on those things? I do not need an awesome printer, I would probably just use it for little brackets and such
07:05:58 <IoTPanic> I would look on youtube for cheap 3d printer reviews, whats your price range?
07:06:44 <IoTPanic> Look out for printers where the build is do cheap it moves around
07:09:08 <rust_collector> my price range is very very low, because I am not really looking for a printer, but this thing came up for $100 or so..
07:09:10 Quit: Dakana123 ([email protected]) Quit: AustNet Chat Network - WebIRC
07:10:30 <rust_collector> the review I did look at, said it was really slow, and had some issues with some surface blemishes, which is a thing I wouldn't really care about
07:34:54 <rust_collector> meh, I think I will just keep saving up for a milling machine.
09:01:42 Join: mrpackethead ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
09:01:59 <mrpackethead> very cool
09:02:03 <mrpackethead> cool bananas
09:16:40 Join: Guest|65573 ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
09:19:13 * T3sl4 refrigerates mrpackethead's fresh produce
09:19:20 Quit: Guest|65573 ([email protected]) Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client
10:43:59 Quit: mrpackethead ([email protected]) Ping timeout: 121 seconds
11:27:27 <Ampera> Anybody programed in 8086 Assembly before that could walk me through how the hell memory is accessed? It's so incredibly confusing, and I'm not just talking segment offset, which I sort of get.
11:30:39 <coppice_> Ampera: that seems like it would be trivial to figure out by looking at almost any chunk of 8086 assembly language code you might find on the internet
11:31:10 <Ampera> you'd think
11:31:21 <Ampera> but I've looked at tutorials, and I still can't figure out what the fuck
11:46:18 <MrMobodies> Hello
11:47:09 <Ampera> Hullo
11:47:16 <MrMobodies> Just got rid of some of my junk just so I can finish off the room
11:48:26 <MrMobodies> It was too much and had to bin most of it
11:49:14 <MrMobodies> I wanted to keep them but I think the mess will put potential buyers off the house
11:50:24 <MrMobodies> Just finished cleaning up and it took two days.
11:52:10 <MrMobodies> https://i.imgur.com/DlvDEFM.jpg
12:00:08 <DHess_US> Ampera, I'll answer your question in a minute.
12:04:00 <DHess_US> Ampera, the assemblers understand context pretty well but addresses are generally put inside brackets []
12:05:12 <DHess_US> So MOV AX.0x0004 loads 4 into the AX register and MOS AX,[0x0004} loads the 16 bit quantity at memory address 0x0004 into the AX regster
12:05:36 <Ampera> Ah, I didn't know they could do that.
12:05:45 <DHess_US> Segmet prefix overrides are in th eform of CS: or DS: or whatever
12:06:09 <DHess_US> So MOV AX,CS:[0x0004]
12:06:11 <Ampera> I thought you would first have to load the address into the right set of registers for how you intend to access it, and then do something
12:06:29 <DHess_US> You can do that also if you like. MOV AX,[BX}
12:06:29 <Ampera> what if I wanted to do both segment and offset?
12:07:05 <DHess_US> MOV AX,CS:[BX+4]
12:07:30 <DHess_US> There are some restrictions about what registers are used for base and offset. I don't remember the details.
12:07:44 <Ampera> Alright, I think I might be able to figure it out from there.
12:07:52 <DHess_US> You probably will never need to use a segment override.
12:07:59 <Ampera> I was following a tutorial that reall complicated matters, but that makes it much easier.
12:08:12 <coppice_> segment overrides are so 16 bit
12:08:28 <DHess_US> This is the book you need, https://www.amazon.com/8086-Book-Russell-Rector/dp/007931029X
12:09:25 <DHess_US> If you are using the 386 or later in 32-bit mode, then the addressing is the same but with fewer restrictions.
12:09:45 <Ampera> what about 286 protected mode?
12:09:49 <Ampera> (just as a curious question)
12:09:54 <DHess_US> Same as the 8086
12:10:06 <Ampera> but isn't the address space > 20bit?
12:10:06 <DHess_US> The 386 is where the addressing modes and instruction set were expanded.
12:10:13 <Ampera> on a 286
12:10:22 <DHess_US> Sure, but that doesn't affect things much.
12:10:27 <coppice_> yes, 286 protected mode is currious. 24 bit addressing in a clunky manner
12:10:36 <Ampera> yeah, it's 24 bit, does that just change how segments and offsets are handled?
12:10:41 <Ampera> just making the segments smaller?
12:10:50 <DHess_US> No more so than 8086 where you have 16 bit addressing combined with 16 bit segments for 20 bits.
12:11:15 <DHess_US> So with the 286, you have 4 bit more worth of segments or 16 more
12:12:18 <DHess_US> Most of that is transparent and handled with the memory management unit. Each segment is still stuck with a 64k length and you use long mode and changing the segment register to address more than 64k at once.
12:12:30 <DHess_US> Honestly I don't remember all of the details.
12:12:51 <DHess_US> Not much 286 protected mode programming was done. Mostly it was used as a faster 8086
12:13:18 <Ampera> I know, I was just curious.
12:13:45 <Ampera> Well hopefully that should get me started, I loved programming with Turbo C, but whenever I tried to do anything interesting it would just not work, and get too complicated for the platform.
12:14:01 <Ampera> So I'm hoping with lower level access, and less having to go through various functions and such, I can actually make something.
12:17:30 <MrMobodies> May I ask what you are using for your programming?
12:17:56 <MrMobodies> Oh sorry Turbo C
12:19:36 <Ampera> Was, I'm going to use NASM now.
12:21:31 <MrMobodies> Thank you. I know it wasn't for me but learning something.
12:21:34 <MrMobodies> http://asmtutor.com/
12:22:22 <DHess_US> There is nothing to stop you from using RISC like separate load/store and ALU instructions but that is up to you.
12:22:40 <DHess_US> In that case you can use all of the regsters interchangably.
12:23:12 <Ampera> I believe that's what the tutorial was describing, but being able to just give flat addresses to an assembler is way easier.
12:24:12 <DHess_US> Full base offset indexed addressign is supported
12:24:34 <DHess_US> And i think the registers are setup to maintain that for accessing two different arrays in separate or the same segment.
12:24:52 <DHess_US> AX then becomes one accumulator and BX the other
12:45:19 Join: ThunderSqueak ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
12:45:29 Mode: (by ChanOP) +o ThunderSqueak
14:16:12 Quit: derek_ ([email protected]) Ping timeout: 121 seconds
15:20:46 Join: andtfoot ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
15:27:41 Quit: DogWomble ([email protected]) Changing hosts
15:27:42 Join: DogWomble ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
15:27:42 Mode: (by lego.jp.austnet.org) +o DogWomble
18:38:27 Quit: ThunderSqueak ([email protected]) Quit: Leaving
19:14:06 * T3sl4 buhs
20:01:43 Quit: Halcyon ([email protected]) Ping timeout: 121 seconds
20:01:58 Join: Halcyon ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
20:03:40 * DogWomble throws chocolate into the channel
20:03:58 Nick: Halcyon is now known as Halcyon1
20:36:07 Quit: HappyLoaf ([email protected]) EOF from client
20:37:03 <steve30> mmm, chocolate
20:51:58 Join: HappyLoaf ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
21:06:55 Quit: andtfoot ([email protected]) EOF from client
21:58:00 Quit: arekm ([email protected]) Connection closed
22:39:46 Join: arekm ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
22:58:11 Quit: arekm ([email protected]) Connection closed
23:02:48 Join: arekm ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
23:29:37 Quit: arekm ([email protected]) Connection closed
23:40:39 Join: ThunderSqueak ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
23:40:39 Mode: (by ChanOP) +o ThunderSqueak
23:41:05 <ThunderSqueak> heh, eevblog on afternet has its user limit capped
23:46:12 <gremlinz> what's the cap?
23:46:21 <ThunderSqueak> no idea
23:46:27 <ThunderSqueak> but cant join the channel
23:46:37 <gremlinz> :/
23:46:42 <ThunderSqueak> there we go
23:46:45 <ThunderSqueak> it let me join
23:54:26 Join: arekm ([email protected]) to #EEVblog
23:58:53 <steve30> there's a netsplit atm if its any relevance
Search this day's buffer: