<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:clearspace="http://www.jivesoftware.com/xmlns/clearspace/rss" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Content in Intel Communities</title>
    <link>/profile-content.jspa?userID=44709&amp;filterID=contentstatus[published]</link>
    <description>Recent content in Intel Communities</description>
    <language>en</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:37:37 GMT</pubDate>
    <generator>Jive SBS 5.0.2.0  (http://jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace/)</generator>
    <dc:date>2011-04-21T15:37:37Z</dc:date>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    <item>
      <title>Criteria for 36/64-bit 4500MHD PCI bar use in Win7?</title>
      <link>http://communities.intel.com/thread/21183</link>
      <description>&lt;!-- [DocumentBodyStart:aa9a0631-5e9c-4595-812a-7990885d6b69] --&gt;&lt;div class="jive-rendered-content"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hi,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I've got an unusual situation where a Dell Inspiron 1440 with 4500MHD/GM45 + T6600-2.2 CPU can setup 36-bit PCI BARs for use in Win7 as described at&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/418851-diy-vidock-experiences-35.html#post6056360" target="_blank"&gt;http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/418851-diy-vidock-experiences-35.html#post6056360&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We can see in the link the 4500MHD 256MB prefectable BAR is located at the 12.25GB (36-bit) boundary. THis is great as it allows the 32-bit freed space to be used for an external desktop GPU which doesn't support 36-bit PCI BARs.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;However, Dell Latitudes with P8xxx/T9xxx CPUs cannot do this, nor can a 2530P with a 4500MHD/GS45 + SL9400-1.86 CPU. In both cases Win7 moves the BARS back into 32-bit space, presumably because 36-bit is inaccessible. This is explained further at&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/418851-diy-vidock-experiences-227.html#post6949956" target="_blank"&gt;http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/418851-diy-vidock-experiences-227.html#post6949956&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm wondering if it's the CPU that's preventing this from happening, or something else. PAE/DEP settings in the BCD don't fix the problem. If it's the CPU then,what MSR bit do I need to set to enable 36-bit PCI BAR usage in Win7? I hope the chipset isn't somehow limiting the PCI access to 32-bit only.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img height="16px" src="http://communities.intel.com/5.0.2/images/emoticons/confused.gif" width="16px"/&gt; : confused :&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Any help would be appreciated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;nando&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- [DocumentBodyEnd:aa9a0631-5e9c-4595-812a-7990885d6b69] --&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:37:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>webadmin@intel.com</author>
      <guid>http://communities.intel.com/thread/21183</guid>
      <dc:date>2011-04-21T15:37:37Z</dc:date>
      <clearspace:dateToText>2 years, 4 weeks ago</clearspace:dateToText>
      <clearspace:objectType>0</clearspace:objectType>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>x1 1.0 pci-e ports not running at full 2.5Gbps speed</title>
      <link>http://communities.intel.com/thread/12910</link>
      <description>&lt;!-- [DocumentBodyStart:b45a99d3-043d-462d-a5c2-d4af9ff47faf] --&gt;&lt;div class="jive-rendered-content"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Hi Everyone,&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/4915/pciespd.png"&gt;&lt;img alt="http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/4915/pciespd.png" class="jive-image" src="http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/4915/pciespd.png"/&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As part of the DIY ViDock project, it has been identified that ICH7/8/9M and HM57&amp;nbsp; I/O controllers are not running to their advertised 2.5Gbps in either direction. There is somewhere between 15-30% less performance than expected. It is not clear why these&amp;nbsp; port are not seeing full performance. Is the port sharing bandwidth with another port? Is it running only half-duplex? This problem was identified by the following signs:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;1.&amp;nbsp; noticably slower performance compared to x1 1.0 set Nvidia MCP79 chipset as shown &lt;a class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/418851-diy-vidock-experiences.html#post5324240" target="_blank"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;2.&amp;nbsp; full x1 1.0 speed is possible if the port is manually switched to have a link width of x2 as shown &lt;a class="jive-link-external-small" href="http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/418851-diy-vidock-experiences-45.html#post6141150" target="_blank"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;. That can only apply to odd numbered ports with no device attached to the next sequential port. We are calling this x1E mode "Intel-Enhanced".&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Point 2 then raises the question: how can *any* pci-e port be switched to gain full x1 1.0 performance? (2) above restricts the performance benefits to only some setups. I have tried numerous settings by referring to ICH9M I/O datasheet with no success so far.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p style="min-height: 8pt; height: 8pt; padding: 0px;"&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If this problem cannot be corrected, then I would like to ask Intel to check their advertising of their pci-e ports as the performance is certainly not 2.5Gbps in either direction. There is precious bandwidth that needs to be uncapped.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- [DocumentBodyEnd:b45a99d3-043d-462d-a5c2-d4af9ff47faf] --&gt;</description>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">pci-e</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">ports</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">ich9m</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">ich7m</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">x1</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">ich8m</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">vidock</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">x1e</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">capped</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">mcp79</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.intel.com/tags#/?containerType=14&amp;container=2094">hm55</category>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 20:33:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>webadmin@intel.com</author>
      <guid>http://communities.intel.com/thread/12910</guid>
      <dc:date>2010-05-05T20:33:34Z</dc:date>
      <clearspace:dateToText>3 years, 2 weeks ago</clearspace:dateToText>
      <clearspace:replyCount>1</clearspace:replyCount>
      <clearspace:objectType>0</clearspace:objectType>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

