Just quick update. Today I installed RST version 126.96.36.1992.
Although the first attempt at the install came back with a "Fatal Error" a check of the driver version in Device Manager showed the correct version. The user interface did not install.
After a reboot, I then ran: SetupRST.exe -Nodrv
and that installed the UI.
I am now going to let the system simmer for about a week before I try Windows Fall Creator 1709 update again.
This message was posted on behalf of Intel Corporation
I understand that you are having crashes with Windows 10 Fall Creators Update, please accept our apologies for the inconvenience that this could be causing.
In this case I regret to inform you are experiencing compatibility issues between your system components and the OS currently installed with your machine.
The reason that we point this out is because according to Asus’s webpage the board that you own has limited support for Windows 10 as you can see on the following link:
If you take a deeper look to the link you will find that the only support given by them on Windows 10 in terms of drivers will be audio drivers, which are basically not related to the issue that you have, meaning that the support will be pretty limited (driver wise)
When it comes about RST, the versions that support Windows 10 will not support the chipset installed on your set up. And on the other hand, the versions of RST that support your chipset will not support Windows 10
On this link you will find the first version of RST (188.8.131.522) that supported Windows 10 released back in 12/14/2015 that as you can see, will not support your chipset.
(You may need to copy and paste the links provided into a separate tab in case that you have issues when clicking on them)
I strongly recommend you to install an operating system with full support when it comes about drivers and software or to update you system components (hardware) in order to get full support when it comes a newer OS such as Windows 10.
Hope this helps,
No, this reply was not helpful at all. It is the usual corporate speak for "we won't help you because we decided not to".
Here I have an *Intel* product (chipset) that happens to be on an ASUS motherboard that is around five years old, and Intel and Microsoft are getting together, by way of laziness if not outright collusion, to try and convince me I have to buy another machine, never mind that I have successfully run 3 different versions of Intel MSM/RST software under Windows 10. And you are effectively telling me it has a useful life of under six years. Guess what: I already have a pretty good idea of what will and will not work (after spending over 20 hours of my time).
Foisting this issue off on the mobo manufacturer is ridiculous, and also not helpful. They don't write the drivers for this stuff. Intel, Microsoft and their sub-contractors do.
So, either you are not sufficiently informed about what actually works (please refer to the link to the other thread which I posted), or Intel is collaborating with Microsoft to mislead customers. Either one is pretty darn bad. Given this attitude, it is no wonder that Microsoft tries to install drivers that are incompatible, if they are getting this kind of nonsense out of Intel.
Part of the reason that I am posting this thread is so that when other people come across it, they will know that there are solutions, even if Intel does not formally support them (even though they really should).
Telling me that I should either upgrade my hardware or downgrade my OS (which is basically impossible at this point) is not helpful at all.
If Intel cannot be helpful (and apparently they cannot), then don't respond at all, or respond, more accurately that 1) Intel no longer formally supports this chipset and 2) others have found usable workarounds, and provide links to them.
What Intel SHOULD do is get off of their corporate behinds, and provide a supported driver for Windows 10 for these middle-aged chipsets. I will certainly tell you that this experience has soured me on ever using the Intel RAID setup on any future motherboard I may acquire, which also means that I will once again take a good hard look at AMD as an alternative to Intel for my processor as well.
Put that in your heatsink and chew on it for a while.
I don't give a rats patootie about what Intel "supports". What matters is what *works* and what Intel and Microsoft really OUGHT to support - among them supporting hardware for a reasonable length of time - and that is a darn sight more than five years.
Let me give folks reading this an education about what it can mean to tell someone that they are supposed to migrate to new hardware and reinstall their operating system.. I bought and installed my machine in fall of 2012. It is still plenty fast: Core i7-950, 12GB. Moving to a new machine would mean expensive new (faster) hardware, but that pales compared to the time spent reinstalling everything, configuring settings, etc.
Here is a list of apps that I use fairly frequently - certainly ALL of them in the last two years:
Applications (ordinary): 3 browsers, Office, Photoshop Elements, iTunes, Audacity, Support for 2 Canon cameras, Quicken, Turbo Tax, Chief Architect Home Designer, eBay TurobLister, Finale (music notation), FitBit, Garmin GPS applications and maps, IrFanView (Scanning), LogiTech Harmony Remote, Punch! Master Landscape Pro, Pinnacle Studio, MIDI-OX, Thunderbird
Applications (engineering): KiCAD (EE CAD), 123d Design (3D modeling for printer), National Instruments LabView support, Ultra Sigma (oscilloscope support), Xilinx FPGA Development software IDE (32 bit and 64 bit), MeshMixer (3D Printing), Cura (3D printing)
Games; NeverWinter Nights, NWN2, Microsoft FSX
Application Development: Visual Studio 2017, Arduino, Android SDK, AcitvePerl, MySQL, Apache, Tortoise SVN, Tortoise GIT, Cygwin
Utilities: Acrobat reader, NovaBackup, PuTTY, APC (UPS), BitTorrent, Cute PDF, BluRay (Cyberlink), GPG (Email encryption), FTP Voyager, IBM Softcopy, NVidia display support, TPLink Switch management, VNC Viewer, Win PCAP, WinZIP, WireShark
If you lost count, that is over *SIXTY* applications. Now, some of them could probably be installed and configured in 30 minutes. Others would liekly take hours to reinstall, find all the important settings and fix them. Last time it took me over 100 hours - and I spent 36 years in IT doing support of mainframes, minis, UNIX, Linux, and PCs from MS-DOS thru Windows from version 1 through 7 [10 came out after I retired].
Now, is this typical? Of course not. But when folks flippantly say that x is not supported, or one ought to go out and buy new hardware, or run an earlier OS (not an option of course), they need to see beyond just the (not trivial) hardware cost to the TOTAL cost of such an effort.
First of all, the x58 chipset was launched in Q4 of 2008. That makes it over 9 years old, not 5. You say you built your system in 2012? That happens to be the year that Intel RETIRED this chipset (and it reached EOL status a year later). This is long before the Windows 10 O/S was released. Why would you expect to see it supported? What is the ROI for Intel to support it on a board that old? There is absolutely none. They should do it just to keep YOU happy? Grow up and start using your brain. No company would do this. No company does this.
N. Scott Pearson, If you cannot actually help, then just don't reply, eh?
What matters to me is when I bought it, not when Intel decided it was passe, and what a reasonable expectation for what was then a pretty high-end CPU and motherboard. I installed Win 7 when I bought it. When I upgraded from Win 7 to Win 10 (and given the Microsoft stance, there was little choice, because if one didn't one was going to lose updates, and have to pay for the upgrade instead of getting it gratis), the upgrade process didn't say *boo* about the hardware not being supported. Nor did the Fall creator's update 1709. It just silently uninstalled my old drivers (and the RST app), and silently installed drivers that simply did not work.
Lots of companies supports lots of products for far longer than the silly computer industry. My NVidia video has supported drivers, thank you very much. So does my RealTek sound chip. Cars. Airplanes. Machine tools. Weapons. And on and on and on. Just because the computer industry (and particularly, the software industry) has its head up its rear end doesn't mean that I am not using my brain or have not, as you say, "grown up".
The ROI for Intel in this case is that, for minimal effort to verify the new code against the older chipsets, they avoid chasing away customers. The ROI for Microsoft is to avoid chasing customers away towards Apple who (partly because of their constrained hardware environment, of course) doesn't saddle people with horribly unstable systems nearly as often as Microsoft does.
As a customer, I don't give a darn about Intel's ROI. I should not have to. I am the customer. I care about *MY* ROI. And having to spend 100+ hours plus upwards of $1,500 to replace my hardware [since I would need to purchase all new, including SSD and drives so that I could keep doing stuff while I migrated] for essentially NO ROI doesn't sit very well with me at all. And I can imagine there are thousands of small businesses that are faced with tese kinds of choices. When I was on Windows 7, the small business that employed my wife was still running on Windows 98.
If you can't actually help, please just don't reply.
The Intel page for 184.108.40.2063 is actually vague on support of the X58 / ICH10R chipset. It also does not help that Intel uses vague terms like "5 Series", which though it does not confuse me, is bound to confuse a lot of people. Near as I can tell, the X58 is "5 Series", and as such, the latest release currently on the Intel page that specifically mentions it is 220.127.116.111.
On the page for 18.104.22.1684 it reads "For Intel Platforms not supported above, visit the RAID version 14.8.0.", which is precisely why I tried 22.214.171.1243.
The page for 126.96.36.1993 (the only 14.8 driver available without "digging" through sometimes questionable 3rd-part sites), which did not run at all, and which is what I tried after the 1709 update gave me problems, there is NO information in the release notes to indicate that any older chipset is not supported. And it indicates it supports Windows 10, 32 and 64 bit.
The readme for 188.8.131.523 indicates it was *designed to provide functionality* for later chipsets, but does NOT say anything about not *working with* earlier chipsets. Indeed, under system requirements, it lists only processors.
The readme for 184.108.40.2063, which is what I upgraded to in November, does specifically mention the X58 chipset, but, of course, is not specifically qualified for Win10 (though it was working just fine, thank you very much, until the 1709 Fall Creator's Update - which I suspect, but do not yet know for sure, almost certainly replaced them with a later driver which does not work).
At the very least, it would make sense for Intel driver installations to check and at least warn people they are about to install a driver that is not supposed to work on their platform. If they at least did that, or aborted the install and avoided replacing earlier drivers which *do* support the X58 chipset, then people would not have nearly the problems they are having.
Again, not helpful. And again: nonsense. An installer should at least recognize that there isn't supported hardware there, and not REPLACE the existing drivers, then. From what I have read online there are likely *thousands* of people struggling with this kind of thing. It's just awful. That is a LOT of customers to have systems where the Fall Creators Update silently replaces their drivers with newer ones that cause their system to fail/crash/fail to boot/BSOD/etc.
1 of 1 people found this helpful
Let me be very clear on my position,
- Intel has made its decision with regards to what it will and will not support and the schedule for products entering the Retired and EOL (unsupported) states is predetermined. Intel will not be changing their decision. Whining about it isn't going to change anything.
- The installers for the various packages are validated on all active and supported products and across all supported Windows versions. I agree that the installers should not attempt to install on unsupported hardware. Most of them don't. Still, having been informed that it is unsupported, you should not be trying to install it.
- I agree that an unholy mess exists with the FCU and with the WU service in general. They have no business updating any driver with a version that is not actually meant to support the underlying hardware. Microsoft is saying that they are doing this because driver bugs are making Windows unstable. Well, if the resulting combination is also going to make it unstable, they shouldn't be doing it either! I don't believe that they actually tested these drivers against this hardware, so they don't know whether they should be installed; yet they are blindly installing them. Worse, they are doing so with an installer that does not appear to check if it is applicable (packages that do that cause them other problems; they then appear over and over in subsequent checks for updates). All this said, why are you complaining here? We have told you that we will not provide support for unsupported hardware or software (or combinations). You should be complaining to Microsoft. Of course, we are actually responding to you whereas Microsoft simply ignores you.
This is a Support Community. If you have further questions about supported hardware and software, go ahead and ask them. Otherwise, I am going to terminate this conversation.
If you are a moderator of some sort, please do not terminate this thread or prevent me from posting to it. In a week I will try the 1709 Windows 10 Update again, and document exactly what drivers they are installing, what what I did about, so that others who may search on this same issue / platform / chipset here can get some good out of it, because few people are documenting what is happening out in the wild. That was all my purpose ever was. This isn't your thread. It is mine.
And it was never my intent or expectation that Intel would necessarily do anything about my particular situation (though I really think that they should).
I may have tracked down the root cause of the "Fatal Error" message during the install of some versions of RST in my install logs (C:\Users\Administrator\Intel\logs\*.log :
MSI (s) (DC:D0) [09:30:41:005]: Product: Intel(R) Rapid Storage Technology -- Error 1923. Service 'Intel(R) Rapid Storage Technology' (IAStorDataMgrSvc) could not be installed. Verify that you have sufficient privileges to install system services.
Unfortunately, I have not yet found anything about how to resolve this. (If one uses -Noservice, then the UI won't install either). Error 1603 - the general installer error code) talks about privileges for SYSTEM on the target drive, but nothing about services.
[Added] But, come to think of it, one might do the driver install first using -Noservice (so that it completes cleanly), then after the reboot, come back and using -Nodrv (which presumably also installs the service, since it installs the UI).