*HP HDX 9000 DRAGON Owners Lounge, Part 2*

[RickiBerlin]

I own an HDX Dragon 9494nr and I have been having problems when installing an SSD and windows 7. I have tried 2 SSDs, a 120GB OCZ Vertex Plus SATA2 and a Muskin Chronos 120GB SATA3 drive and both hard lock every few minutes when they are installed in the laptop.

However they both have no problems when installed in my main gaming rig.

Is there anyone on this forum how has experienced problems with the Dragon and SSDs and Win7?

Has anyone had luck with an SSD and the Dragon?

I use "SATA2 and SATA3" Intel SSD in the HDX without any problems. (see my signature)

As a driver I'm using "Intel Rapid Storage Technology 10.1.0.1008 ". (more "HDX" drivers see my signature, under "Driver"

Perhaps "LPM" your problem. Unfortunately I have no time for further explanations.

Please describe exactly what happens! Which driver do you use?

[Digitalwindow]

I think you have the wrong idea. The change from "X9000" to "X9100" is not really worthwhile.
You should not think about it.

Overcome your "X9000" an "Intel Burn Test" at 3.4 GHz? If so, at what voltage? What are the maximum temperature?
If not, then X9100 is actually a little better.

Thank you for advice No doubt your testing is conclusive!!

Forcing my computer to run for 10 hours without practical use makes no sense to me. The probability of HD crash merges with CPU instability for such long 'burns'. It is much more practical to run 3DSMax, Pro Tools, or Flight Simulator (maxed) to fully realize cpu/pc performance. In these cases I've mentioned, 3.8 Ghz with x9000 is absolutely stable (on my E0, including < 70C max).

But, for anyone wanting more x9100 evaluation, this may be a good buy:


(Notice SLGEA instead of SLGE7)

NEW Intel E8435 SLGEA 3.06G 6M 1066>T9800 T9600(=X9100) | eBay


and, to confirm SLGEA compatibility:

Intel Core 2 Duo E8435 processor - FF80576GH0836M / AW80576GH0836M / AW80576GH0836ML

[User Retired 2]

But, for anyone wanting more x9100 evaluation, this may be a good buy:


(Notice SLGEA instead of SLGE7)

NEW Intel E8435 SLGEA 3.06G 6M 1066>T9800 T9600(=X9100) | eBay


and, to confirm SLGEA compatibility:

Intel Core 2 Duo E8435 processor - FF80576GH0836M / AW80576GH0836M / AW80576GH0836ML

Those E8435 units run 3.06Ghz (266x11) and have no unlocked multiplier. They'd be running at 2.2Ghz (200x100) on a HDX9000 after applying a 200Mhz BSEL mod. Not a good choice if wanting performance.

The best CPU upgrades for a HDX9000 are:

QX9300$^! > X9100-E0 stepping^! > X9100-C0 stepping^! > X9000! > T9500-2.6* > T9300-2.5* > T8300-2.4*

$= requires more RickiBerlin investigation, perhaps using 8730W schematic for quad support.
^ = requires 266->200Mhz BSEL pinmod and system will bootup with slower clock until do (!) below
! = overclock using unlocked multipliers with Throttlestop
* = overclock method: dual-IDA bios to gain an extra multiplier + PLL pinmod to allow setPLL overclock 200->~250Mhz BSEL.

[RickiBerlin]

and, to confirm SLGEA compatibility:

Intel Core 2 Duo E8435 processor - FF80576GH0836M / AW80576GH0836M / AW80576GH0836ML

This is a bad idea. E8435 has no open multiplier.
In the "HDX" could not compensate for the wrong FSB (1066MHz vs. 800MHz) are made.
Possible compensation would therefore be only "SetPll". Here, however, the limited RAM.

Impact in numbers: E8435 clock in HDX = 2.3 GHz (200MHz x 11.5)
When using "SetPll" E8485 clock in HDX = 2.7 GHz (237MHz x 11.5)

The E8435 should not be used in the HDX.

[RickiBerlin]

Those E8435 units run 3.06Ghz (266x11) and have no unlocked multiplier. They'd be running at 2.2Ghz (200x100) on a HDX9000 after applying a 200Mhz BSEL mod. Not a good choice if wanting performance.

Of course, you were faster again.You've had published when I had translated my post. I've seen your post until after my release. This had happened once before.

Good morning nando4

EDIT: Changing the subject:

My experiments with QX9300 I had then continued. Your proposal (not using acpi) were functional, but is also used only one core.
I used Knoppix on USB. I tried about 20 different launch commands. It boots but only with "acpi = off".
The reciprocal experiment in "HDX with dual core" shows, is also booted in "acpi = off" only one core.

As soon as I get new ideas I am testing the "QuadCPU" continues. Thank you for your new ideas!

[RickiBerlin]

Thank you for advice No doubt your testing is conclusive!!

Forcing my computer to run for 10 hours without practical use makes no sense to me. The probability of HD crash merges with CPU instability for such long 'burns'. It is much more practical to run 3DSMax, Pro Tools, or Flight Simulator (maxed) to fully realize cpu/pc performance. In these cases I've mentioned, 3.8 Ghz with x9000 is absolutely stable (on my E0, including < 70C max).

I think you do not understand the real relationship. Also, any "X9000" is a C0 revision (not E0)! See an excerpt from your post.

Currently I am with TS 3.0. BSOD dump when overclock unstable.

@ 3.8 GHz, 1.3500 volts is absolutely stable (works @ 1.3000 volts if no game tests)

@ 4.0 GHz, 1.4125 volts is absolutely stable (much too noisy and unnecessary)

This is wrong! Absolute stability is only one successfully completed "Intel Burn Test". And this test consists only of normal computing operations. (No CPU has a "going hot" switch)
This requirement may also occur with other software and parallel computations. Maybe not with the software you have. But, by the way also works your "OS".
Although there is no "BSOD" is, you may encounter errors of calculation. This miscalculation can your "OS" can be corrupt. This is worse than a one-time "BSOD".

For precisely this reason, I always call several voltages for a frequency. These values ​​are exact values, even if these are for 3.8 GHz happen very smoothly. These voltages are confirmed by multiple test runs.
Here is an excerpt from my post:

X9100 QHBQ 3.8 GHz are stable at 1.3 V for WPrime32M. WEI requires 1.35 V. WPrime1024M required 1.4 V. Intel burn test requires 1.4375 V but is thermic shutdown.

Yes you can remain somewhat below the voltage which stand for "IBT" is required (1.4375) is.
My recommendation would be 1.4 V at 3.8 GHz for higher loads.
1.35 V are apparently stable. You are dangerous but least so that the integrity of your system.
1.30 V with no load does not produce an equal "BSOD". Even a WPrime32M is possible. The "BSOD" but comes with no load after some time. The voltage is too low.
The tricky here, it may also have mathematical errors in the background without the "BSOD" occur.
All figures are in this case on the "X9100 QHBQ"!

My guess is the "X9000" is stable under this Directive to a maximum of 3.6 GHz. Maybe there would even be a thermic cut-off at this frequency below the required voltage for the "IBT".
This would mean that would be "X9000" only up to 3.4 GHz really stable.
3.8 GHz and 4.0 GHz are excluded absolutely! Who uses these frequencies is living with a very high risk of data corruption.

My paintings for the "X9100" often arisen under unstable conditions. For example, the value of "WPrime1.55 32M with 18.184s while real, however, is a clock of 4.2 GHz completely unrealistic.
At this frequency there is no load a "BSOD" after a few hours. Actually it's wrong of me to publish such images. These create a false impression. But the images also be fun.

[RickiBerlin]

I own an HDX Dragon 9494nr and I have been having problems when installing an SSD and windows 7. I have tried 2 SSDs, a 120GB OCZ Vertex Plus SATA2 and a Muskin Chronos 120GB SATA3 drive and both hard lock every few minutes when they are installed in the laptop.

However they both have no problems when installed in my main gaming rig.

Is there anyone on this forum how has experienced problems with the Dragon and SSDs and Win7?

Has anyone had luck with an SSD and the Dragon?

I use "SATA2 and SATA3" Intel SSD in the HDX without any problems. (see my signature)

As a driver I'm using "Intel Rapid Storage Technology 10.1.0.1008 ". (more "HDX" drivers see my signature, under "Driver"

Perhaps "LPM" your problem. Unfortunately I have no time for further explanations.

Please describe exactly what happens! Which driver do you use?

So now I had some time. I wrote you two "Reg Values". If you choose "Intel Rapid Storage Technology" uses, then try the shutdown time by "LPM"! (Link Power Management)

That should solve your problem with both SSD. My "Reg Values" only change "port 0". This is important. Use no more "Reg Values" other sources.

Of course you can also perform these changes manually. Then go to this registry value:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \ SYSTEM \ CurrentControlSet \ services \ iaStor \ Parameters \ Port 0] *

See you at my "Reg value changes" on the editor and change it manually.

* With a fresh version of Windows 7, this value does not exist. That's because you had not installed a older "intel matrix storage driver." But this is not a problem. Then just create this key.

But it is easier to use my "Reg Values". <-------- Download

1."LPM''off''(change only port''0'') RickiBerlin.reg" = LPM deactivation
2 "LPM''on''(default) RickiBerlin.reg" = LPM activation

After the change, a restart is required.

Even though this is not a risk, please do a system restore point before!
Alternatively, system backup.

Want more information see here!

In "Intel SSD" alternatively via this registry value "DIPM" for Device Initiated Power Management: changeable. However, by disabling this value "1" (not "0" as in LPM)
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Power\PowerSettings\0012ee47-9041-4b5d-9b77-535fba8b1442\0b2d69d7-a2a1-449c-9680-f91c70521c60]

[DRAGONe]

... I have been having problems when installing an SSD and windows 7. ... lock every few minutes ...

Is there anyone on this forum who has experienced problems with the Dragon and SSDs and Win7? Has anyone had luck with an SSD and the Dragon?

I also recently installed a SSD (160GB X-25M G2) and experienced the same scenario, however only after installing "RST".

Perhaps "LPM" your problem. Please describe exactly what happens! Which driver do you use?

Have you installed any drivers, other than what Windows Update has prompted, or made any mods to the power management profile?

If you choose "Intel Rapid Storage Technology" uses, then try the shutdown time by "LPM"! (Link Power Management)

That should solve your problem with both SSD. My "Reg Values" only change "port 0". This is important. Use no more "Reg Values" other sources.

Of course you can also perform these changes manually. Then go to this registry value:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE \ SYSTEM \ CurrentControlSet \ services \ iaStor \ Parameters \ Port 0] *

See you at my "Reg value changes" on the editor and change it manually.

* With a fresh version of Windows 7, this value does not exist. That's because you had not installed a older "intel matrix storage driver." But this is not a problem. Then just create this key.

But it is easier to use my "Reg Values". <-------- Download

1."LPM''off''(change only port''0'') RickiBerlin.reg" = LPM deactivation
2 "LPM''on''(default) RickiBerlin.reg" = LPM activation

After the change, a restart is required.

Even though this is not a risk, please do a system restore point before!
Alternatively, system backup.

Want more information see here!

In "Intel SSD" alternatively via this registry value "DIPM" for Device Initiated Power Management: changeable. However, by disabling this value "1" (not "0" as in LPM)
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Power\PowerSettings\0012ee47-9041-4b5d-9b77-535fba8b1442\0b2d69d7-a2a1-449c-9680-f91c70521c60]

THX RB for pointing out the missing registry value; I'll give that a shot myself soon.

[RickiBerlin]

I also recently installed a SSD (160GB X-25M G2) and experienced the same scenario, however only after installing "RST".

I use IntelMatrixSorageT and IntelRapidStorageT without problems from 2008 to today. (HDD and SSD)
In conjunction with SSD always performs better than MSAHCI. I do not know what you're doing wrong.

Have you installed any drivers, other than what Windows Update has prompted, or made any mods to the power management profile?

I will not install drivers on windows update. I have all the drivers themselves. And mine are getting better and newer. Of course there are changes in my energy-saving plans.
For example, my drives are switched off after 5 minutes. Under battery power even after 2 minutes. Other changes are insignificant in this context.

THX RB for pointing out the missing registry value; I'll give that a shot myself soon.

G2 has no problems with LPM. Other SSD have problems with that. You need to change anything. In my "Intel 510" is "LPM" currently active again. I test on the way the SSD.
Both Intel behave differently in the write load. It is not comprehensible for me. See also a "thread" from me. Unfortunately, both answers on the topic were over.
That's why I never responded. That's different "Host Writes" and different "Power-On Hours Count" is that I see it myself. I just like to know why.
Especially when both are treated the same SSD.
LPM apparently plays no role.

[Digitalwindow]

Those E8435 units run 3.06Ghz (266x11) and have no unlocked multiplier. They'd be running at 2.2Ghz (200x100) on a HDX9000 after applying a 200Mhz BSEL mod. Not a good choice if wanting performance.

The best CPU upgrades for a HDX9000 are:


$= requires more RickiBerlin investigation, perhaps using 8730W schematic for quad support.
^ = requires 266->200Mhz BSEL pinmod and system will bootup with slower clock until do (!) below
! = overclock using unlocked multipliers with Throttlestop
* = overclock method: dual-IDA bios to gain an extra multiplier + PLL pinmod to allow setPLL overclock 200->~250Mhz BSEL.

My mistake. I see the PN has a Z instead of G though all the rest the same for one.

To the benefit of everyone as usual, nando4