How related are memory controller and graphics on 2nd Generation Core?

[mlade]

I have a system with i5-2500K and DH67BL. I only bought the processor because it was on sale for a great price at Micro Center. I had two sticks of 1333 Crucial memory in it but then I acquired two more of the same stuff (used) so I inserted it into the mobo. A bunch of strange BSOD errors appeared but the text didn't make any sense. I suspected the new memory but I tested it in other systems and it worked fine. I even removed the original memory and used the two new sticks and that worked fine. So I think the processor memory controller has problems though I suppose it could be the mobo. I'm done testing. Sorry, I forgot to write down the error text. If the memory controller really is to blame I might destroy it by further testing.

IPDT does not show any errors. But does it really only do a cursory memory controller test?

I am pondering buying a graphics card to reduce the strain on the processor. Would eliminating the power usage and heat associated with Intel graphics reduce the strain on the memory controller?

[AlHill]

You purchased a "new" i5-2500K processor at Microcenter? This processor is 7 years old, and no longer supported.

https://ark.intel.com/products/52210/Intel-Core-i5-2500K-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3-70-GHz- Intel® Core™ i5-2500K Processor (6M Cache, up to 3.70 GHz) Product Specifications

And, your motherboard is also 7 years old, and no longer supported.

https://ark.intel.com/products/50098/Intel-Desktop-Board-DH67BL Intel® Desktop Board DH67BL Product Specifications

Now, the motherboard supports 32gb, but you would have to use the proper memory to achieve that.

I do not see your Crucial memory on the tested memory list for your board:

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000006556/boards-and-kits/desktop-boards.html System Memory for the Intel® Desktop Board DH67BL

In my opinion, buying a graphics card would be a bad investment for a motherboard and processor as old as what you have. And, you will face a PCIe x16 compatibility issue (unless you buy an old graphics card). Any new card is going to be PCIe 3.0, while your motherboard supports only PCIe 2.0. Yes, the manufacturer of the card will claim backward compatibility. However, just search the forum for other users who believed this. And, if it were backward compatible, it would be running in a degraded mode. If you purchased an old PCIe 2.0 card, are you really making a wise purchase?

And, your processor and board are not supported on Windows 10, if that is your goal.

So, again in my opinion, you should use your disposable income for hardware that is current, and supported.

Just an opinion.

Doc (not an Intel employee or contractor).

[mlade]

Thanks for the reply, but this isn't a warranty issue. I did not select "warranty" as one of the tags.

I understand the PCIe issue, as 3.0 cards negotiate to 2.0 at 1/2 the speed and I understood that compatibility is often an issue.

Crucial memory always works in my experience. I understand that Intel did not test it, however. I should have said before that all of the sticks were 4 GB, keeping way below the 32 GB limit.

As for Windows 10, it works fine, though I had to debug the drivers and then prevent Windows from updating them via settings.

I'm just trying to keep a system alive longer. Buying a new graphics card is a lot cheaper than buying a complete system. And there are some PCIe 2.0 cards still available.

So how close are the memory controller and GPU on the chip?

[n_scott_pearson]

So, you have two "old" DIMMs and two "new" DIMMs.

First of all, have you tested with only the "new" DIMMs? That is, take out the "old" DIMMs and insert the "new" DIMMs in their place. If you run tests with just the two "old" DIMMs or with just the two "new" DIMMs and everything work fine in both cases, then you have a compatibility issue between the "old" and "new" DIMMs. Let's look at this further...

Which sockets were the "old" DIMMs in and which sockets were the "new" DIMMs in? You probably started with the two "old" DIMMs in the blue sockets. That is, DIMM1 and DIMM2 or, more specifically, Channel A DIMM 1 and Channel B DIMM 1. If you left these two DIMMs in these sockets and inserted the "new" DIMMs into the other two sockets (DIMM3 and DIMM4 or, more specifically, Channel A DIMM 0 and Channel B DIMM 0), then you put one "new" DIMM and one "old" DIMM together onto each memory channel. Bad Move; never do this. The DIMMs on a channel must be completely identical. Not close; identical. That is, you should have put the two "old" DIMMs together on one channel and the two "new" DIMMs together on the other channel. This means placing the "old" DIMMs in sockets DIMM1 and DIMM3 and the "new" DIMMs in sockets DIMM2 and DIMM4 (or the opposite, placing the "old" DIMMs in sockets DIMM2 and DIMM4 and the "new" DIMMs in sockets DIMM1 and DIMM3).

In fact, however, making that change may not solve all problems. I believe that this particular board's design supports only one set of configuration parameters across all four DIMMs. Their attributes must match perfectly across the board. If they don't match perfectly, problems are likely to occur. Now, the problem is that Crucial continues to use the same part number for their DIMMs but, from one year to the next, the configuration parameters for the DIMMs may be different (typically because the individual DRAM ICs used are different). They indicate this with a different "dash" number after the main part number. So, question: What are the full and complete part numbers (including any "dash" number) for each of the DIMMs you have? If you are unsure of how to read this, take pictures of the stickers on the DIMMs and attach them to your response.

Hope this helps,

...S

[mlade]

Thanks for the details. That's exactly what I like, because then I learn something interesting.

It seems I did a poor job explaining my situation. Not the first time. All four sticks are the same model, Crucial Ballistix Tactical DDR3-1333 4 GB, all bought within a one-year period. The old sticks were ones which have been in the PC for years and the new ones were actually not new, just new to the PC.

Let me grab all of the sticks, copy down the part # s, and get back to you in an hour.

[mlade]

Not nearly an hour.

All four part # s are the same -- BLT4G3D1337DT1XT0.16FM -- and I bought these many years ago in 2-stick sets from either Crucial or Amazon (the new sticks are one set and the old sticks are another). That's interesting about the part after the dot, so I guess that's like what WDC does with its HDDs, sometimes changing the # of platters but keeping the same model # before the dot or dash.

But back to dual channel. So if I only have two sticks, in either the blue or black sockets, I'm not using dual channel.

By the way, the system never blue-screens when I use just two sticks, just when I use four. It's not a big issue, because memory usage never goes above 4 GB or so.

I must confess I'm not sure if I tested with only the new sticks. Let me do that and use it for a day.

By the way, since you seem to be an Intel insider, maybe you can tell me just how seriously IPDT tests memory controllers. Does it do a stress test?

[n_scott_pearson]

Sorry, I cannot answer that. While I was an Intel employee for a lot of years, I am retired now (a volunteer here) and not (well, no longer) in the know for that level of detail. Intel Customer Support will need to answer it...

...S

[mlade]

The PC has been running for many hours now and a few reboots. I have seen no issues whatsoever. There's no guarantees in life but it seems like both sets of memory are okay.

At this point I should add the old set and see what happens but I'm worried about trashing the memory controller. I know I'm not comparing apples with apples, but someone I know installed DDR3-1600 memory into a 6-series mobo with a 2nd Generation Core processor (sorry, I don't know the model # s). The processor died so the memory was too fast for the processor. I can add a graphics card to replace trashed Intel graphics but I can't add anything to replace a trashed memory controller.

You said you're a retired Intel engineer so you probably know the answer to this question: are the memory controller and graphics right next to each other on 2nd Generation Core processors?

[n_scott_pearson]

I have both 6 and 7 Series boards hosting 2nd generation Core processors and they are running with DDR3-1600 memory just fine. In fact, I have even used DDR3-1800 memory in these boards without issue. Using memory that is too fast for the processor is not, in and of itself, going to cause damage the processor's memory controllers. If someone told you this, then they don't know what they are talking about. In the case you described, processor damage occurring likely had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it was DDR3-1600 memory. It is more likely that, (a) the memory being added was bad and this caused damage to the processor, (b) in the process of adding the memory, static electricity was introduced that damaged the processor or (c) in the process of adding the memory, the board was damaged and this ultimately led to damage to the processor.

Unless you do something stupid, I don't believe that inserting this memory will have any affect on the memory controllers. It might not work, but it won't damage the memory controllers. When you insert this memory, remember to isolate the old memory to one memory controller (channel) and the new memory to the other memory controller (channel).

Where the memory controllers reside and where the graphics subsystem resides can vary from one core design to another. In general, they are usually well separated. The Sandy Bridge quad-core processors have the graphics subsystem at one end of the die and the memory controllers, for the most part, at the other end of the die:

...S

[mlade]

You've completely answered my questions, thanks. There is no reason for me to add a graphics card.

[n_scott_pearson]

Well, no reason related to these particular issues anyway. Ultimately, it will depend upon what you want to do with this system. If you are attempting to do really graphics-intensive activities (especially gaming), you might want to consider a graphics upgrade (the graphics in the 2nd generation processors wasn't all that powerful; checkout where it falls in the performance charts at Tom's Hardware). Then again, taking modern graphics cards and putting them into systems this old can cause compatibility issues (PCIe, BIOS (UEFI), etc.). My personal opinion is that, if you are going to do graphics-intensive stuff, it is probably time to upgrade both the board and processor (and this will mean upgrading the memory (from DDR3 to DDR4) as well).

Just saying,

...S