Check this out, Re: Problem with RAM [MB: DZ68BC]
Currently running on 0039, all is well for me while using my procedure but the sad truth is the Intel ME 0.0.0.0 Brought by 0035 and PCH 0.0. Issue Brought by BIOS 0037 are still present but there is a permanent workaround to make the work correctly. first if you are using Blue DIMMs as stated by the manual as recommend ignore that and use the Black DIMMs thats if you have 2 Memory sticks or 1 so use method below
Oh Populate only the first Black DIMM and live the others empty then if it works add the second stick to the remaining Black DIMM and you are good to go no issues.
Safest RAM Configuration is, first ignore the blue ones as primary DIMMs i assume this goes for Ivy Bridge users only I guess the primary DIMMs using Ivy Bridge are Black.
So for those using 1 RAM stick populate the first Black DIMM from the CPU side.
For those using 2 RAM Sticks populate the 2 Black DIMMs
For those using 3 RAM Sticks populate the 2 Black DIMMs and the first Blue DIMM from the CPU side
For those using 4 RAM Sticks its a no brainier populate all DIMMs all should be well, no issue there.
this tests have Been done using Ivy Bridge CPU and those scenarios produce working conditions with BIOS 0039 the Intel ME and PCH issue not present with those configurations.
Intel ME PCH issue present while using only the Blue DIMMs or while not using the first Black DIMM after the CPU. Simply put the First Black DIMM is the Key DIMM while using Ivy Bridge, Never had any issues with Sandy Bridge the only issue was when 0035 displayed wrong values but then i was changing to Ivy Bridge so i needed the 0035 BIOS.
I used to have the same "unknown processor" problem with BIOS 0037 and my i7-2600K. Somehow it resolved itself and it didn't came back in 0039. I have no clue what resolved it. I disabled/enabled UEFI to flash my Crucial M4 SSD to the 10G firmware but that would be a strange trigger...
My ME version lists 184.108.40.2066. Does somebody know how the BIOS decides which revision to use? (the readme stats that both 220.127.116.116 and 18.104.22.1682 are included. I thought that ME v8 was for Ivy bridge, but now it seems it also to work with an i5-2500K on a 401 revision board?
I'd very much curious on how the BIOS decides which version of Intel ME to install apart from the obvious processor architecture that could be the trigger.
How the BIOS decides might have a glitch that causes the Intel ME to act abnormal and show 0.0.0.0, who knows what goes on! I'd very much like to know how this happens.
We have had all kinds of stability issues with the board and bios. We also have only been able to solve all the issues with a different board. My most recent build with 37 seemed to be stable for the last week but then today the video on it died. Its not the first time I've had the no video issue with this board. I've tried the HDMI port, display port, and an addon card. Nothing. No even POST messages. The error and beep codes have gone away so the machine thinks everything is AOK with 39 (I did the recovery update process since I didn't have video) but still no video. I'm open to suggestions.
So the 0037 is the rout of the video problems on the DZ68BC according to the tests i did with all the 003x BIOS from 0035, 0036,0037 & now on 0039.
The video problems originate from the 0037 BIOS this is a fact.
So to try and help you, if you can down grade the DZ68BC BIOS to either 0036 or 0035 and see if it will come back to life since those BIOS dint have video issue they only had other horrible issues but at list a machine can be up and running, if the above works then maybe skip 0037 afterwards and straight to 0039.
Maybe try using a PCI legacy VGA Card.
Plus maybe to get it up again remove all the things attached to the board except CPU, remove all the ram, HDDs and any other thing then remove the CMOS battery for like 5 - 10m then reattach them back, note with the RAM remove all sticks and use the first black DIMM next to the CPU it appears to behave as the Key DIMM only use One Ram stick at that point and then if all goes well add the rest.
Man Intel you guys suck. After reading this I'll stick with 0028. I see it's the same crowd that has had issues in the past. This board is JUNK! Even with 0028 I'll power the computer on sometimes to find out that the BIOS has reset itself and lost all of my settings. Just think guys and gals when Broadwell gets here we might all be forced to use Intel boards.
Fixed issue where hard disk drive is not recognized when SATA mode is set to AHCI
Relative to what version? I've seen one drive drop out of the BIOS a couple times in 0028 over the time I've been using it (most of the year), and I was thinking that it was a failing drive, but finding this in the release notes gives me pause.
I am on 0039 too, the only thing it got solved is the Marvell/Ahci.
I am still unable to OC my i5 3570K, and verything is greyed out, even i dont have the field to manually select my memory speed...
Truth is, this MOBO has been a huge disappointment, and i dont have any chance of RMA (cos´ Intel does no say a word bout this, so, it is no ´malcfunction´) and they´re dropping it...
So, im stuck with a limited Board, and CERO advantages of having an Unlocked K Procesor... a shame, really...
I wish that a 0040+ version comes out solving all the OC, Host Freq, Memory, etc, issues this Mobo has.
Extreme series???... yeha... sure... :/
Indeed, i always had a 3570k, so, no v0028 for.
Since day cero, with 0035 and up to 0038, if i had a SATAIII drive in the light blue conectors (Marvell) in AHCI mode, windows never got to start, or crashed during load, o it started, but was riduculously SLOW, with freezes an lag etc. So, had to revert to IDE, Legacy.
Now i can work in AHCI (still, did not had the chance to do some quicks benchs to see if there is any significant difference)
Eitherway, was one of the many things supposed to work... but that never worked. Now at least, it does.