EPTSimple Questions Simple Answers - Page 371
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
| ||
|
Phyanketto
United States601 Posts
On August 12 2013 08:20 Ropid wrote: When you say cleaned and reformatted, did you only format C: or did you also delete all those hidden partitions you can't usually see in the Windows File Explorer? The partitions and everything. I have yet to be able to boot windows 7. It never finished installing. It gets to lik 70%, then reboots, and then I have all these junk files that end up becoming windows.old. Sometimes I get the bootmgr error, but then when I wait a few hours and try again, it's gone. I am lost. | ||
|
scott31337
United States2979 Posts
The other is double checking your disk is clean, duplicating it, or installing from USB, if you have another machine. The other would be heat, but if it's rebooting at the same 70%ish spot every time, I do not think it's a heat issue. Make sure all of your USB devices besides mouse and keyboard are removed as well, and any cards in the SD card readers. Can you provide some specs on this machine so we have a better idea what your working with? Desktop/Laptop Model or Motherboard model? Just my 2c | ||
|
Phyanketto
United States601 Posts
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1llwP Unfortunately, I don't have another machine; I'm posting all this from an ipod. | ||
|
Phyanketto
United States601 Posts
On August 12 2013 08:50 scott31337 wrote: Sometimes that Windows "reformat" does not work, I recommend getting http://www.hirensbootcd.org/download/ or http://www.dban.org/download and running DBAN ( Direk's boot and nuke) with a simple pass to make sure it's actually clean. (7 isn't as grumpy as XP on this, but I've had to on a couple machines for the new install to stick) The other is double checking your disk is clean, duplicating it, or installing from USB, if you have another machine. The other would be heat, but if it's rebooting at the same 70%ish spot every time, I do not think it's a heat issue. Make sure all of your USB devices besides mouse and keyboard are removed as well, and any cards in the SD card readers. Can you provide some specs on this machine so we have a better idea what your working with? Desktop/Laptop Model or Motherboard model? Just my 2c Also, how would I run that if I can't boot to anything (i.e. the bootmgr is missing?) | ||
|
mav451
United States1596 Posts
Are your other parts working pulls? + Show Spoiler + Optical drive, SATA cable, RAM/DIMM slots - are you using a new computer, or an existing build? Are these parts all confirmed as working? | ||
|
Phyanketto
United States601 Posts
| ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
On August 12 2013 08:40 Phyanketto wrote: The partitions and everything. I have yet to be able to boot windows 7. It never finished installing. It gets to lik 70%, then reboots, and then I have all these junk files that end up becoming windows.old. Sometimes I get the bootmgr error, but then when I wait a few hours and try again, it's gone. I am lost. Alright... so, there's "MBR" and "GPT" partitioning schemes for drives. If you use MBR, Windows does not need any of those funny invisible partitions to boot. You can create the partition for the installation program by hand, and set it to be the active partition that will be booted by the BIOS. You could try this: Boot from the Windows installation disc. There's a way to get into Disk Management. If the drive is completely empty, you can convert it to MBR if it's GPT at the moment. There's an entry for that in the right-click menu if you click on the lower left side where it says "Disk 0". After it's MBR, create an NTFS partition and set it to be active. It should say it's a "primary partition". Go back to the normal installation program and choose this partition as target. About that GPT vs. MBR business, there's a new BIOS replacement that's called "UEFI". UEFI wants a GPT drive instead of MBR, but it can still boot from MBR. The 1 TB size drive you have isn't too large for MBR. If you see "legacy" boot mode somewhere in the UEFI, it means this GPT/MBR stuff, booting from MBR = legacy. The new UEFI boot mode uses a GPT drive and wants those invisible partitions and you can't create any of those by yourself. You need the Windows installation program to create those. | ||
|
Phyanketto
United States601 Posts
| ||
|
nosliw
United States2716 Posts
| ||
|
Craton
United States17303 Posts
| ||
|
Kuznagi
Canada58 Posts
with GA-Z87X-D3H MOBO. When I put my ram into slot 1/3 or 2/4 I get constant beeping when it boots up, so currently I have to put it in slots 3/4. Unfortunately it shows my RAM as single channel, any suggestions? Thanks! | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
| ||
|
Riggins
United States9 Posts
What I am doing now is (gasp) disabling the NVidia driver and playing using the Intel HD Graphics card instead. I put everything on the Low settings, physics off, and things run ok. I'd rather be playing with stuff on High and Ultra like before though! Anyone else have this issue? Better yet, anyone find a solution?! Thanks. | ||
|
felisconcolori
United States6168 Posts
I'm not sure if I can see much difference between the two processors, and overclocking is a "might be nice but not likely unless it lets me run Kerbal Space Program with massive rockets". | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
Games don't utilize the hyperthreading of an i7, future games might but you'd probably want a new computer by than... like seriously how many people are still holding onto their Q6600s from five years ago for Battlefield. So you'd be essentially wasting $100 on an i7 over an i5 in hopes that a game within the next year will take advantage of the extra threads. And regardless, you'd want Haswell (4th Generation Core) aka the 4770k or 4670k. | ||
|
felisconcolori
United States6168 Posts
On August 13 2013 16:36 skyR wrote: K suffix processors are meant for overclocking so if you have no intention of doing so than it's a waste of $20 over a non-K suffix. Games don't utilize the hyperthreading of an i7, future games might but you'd probably want a new computer by than... like seriously how many people are still holding onto their Q6600s from five years ago for Battlefield. So you'd be essentially wasting $100 on an i7 over an i5 in hopes that a game within the next year will take advantage of the extra threads. And regardless, you'd want Haswell (4th Generation Core) aka the 4770k or 4670k. Well, considering my current computer is an AMD Phenom II x4 that I bought about 5 years ago, and the only thing I've updated is my GPU and PSU, I'm looking for all around flexibility. Also, just about everything but the motherboard and CPU would carry over - unless my xfx HD5770 takes a dive, in which case that'll be replaced as well. That said, I was just wondering if there was any real difference between the two - comparing on NewEgg doesn't really give much in the way of difference unless the Turbo and L2 cache really make that much difference. | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
While the differences between the two are mostly under the hood and only equate to minor gains for the typical consumer. There really is no point in buying the older Ivybridge when the difference between the two is a measly $10 or less. I'm not sure what kind of flexibility you're looking at. If you have interest in tasks that make use of lots of threads than yes getting an i7 makes sense. Though for strictly gaming, you're just going to end up wasting money. Starcraft II will run the same on both an i7 4770k and an i5 4670k given that they are clocked equally. In AAA titles, you'd be hindered by the weak 5770. | ||
|
felisconcolori
United States6168 Posts
On August 13 2013 17:00 skyR wrote: Ivybridge was a die-shrink of Sandybridge while Haswell is a new architecture on 22nm so yes there is plenty of differences such as the voltage regulator being moved to the die, better IMC, better IGP, and so on. Motherboard quality for the most part have also improved this generation. While the differences between the two are mostly under the hood and only equate to minor gains for the typical consumer. There really is no point in buying the older Ivybridge when the difference between the two is a measly $10 or less. I'm not sure what kind of flexibility you're looking at. If you have interest in tasks that make use of lots of threads than yes getting an i7 makes sense. Though for strictly gaming, you're just going to end up wasting money. Starcraft II will run the same on both an i7 4770k and an i5 4670k given that they are clocked equally. In AAA titles, you'd be hindered by the weak 5770. Yeah, I figure the weak point would wind up being the GPU - hence it already having been replaced once (twice, if you count what TigerDirect did to the base system before I bought it), and I wish I had read a few threads at that time because I think I overdid the power supply. But I'll save that for future exploration - thanks very much for the information. + Show Spoiler + I won't lie - supporting sponsors may also play a role, if I have the money when it comes time. Some of the lower end Asus RoG parts look really sexy. The high end looks really sexy, but I can't claim I'd ever fully use something like the Extreme line. | ||
|
Gumbi
Ireland463 Posts
So a 3570k will set you back 200 for CPU (or less, I could probably get one for 190), 27 for the cooler (hyper 212, most 3570ks can do 4.6ghz at 1.3v, which the hyper 212 can cool just about, even under synthetic load), 75-80 for the motherboard. Compared to a tad more for the Haswell chip, a slightly better cooler (macho hr 02 for 36 euro (superb value btw, it's worth getting this over the 212 for 3570k unless penny-pinching)), a much more expensive motherboard (~130 euro or more, there are some reasonable Asrock ones for ~115 I think. All in all a Haswell setup will only perform marginally better (if at all, as the 3570k might very well overclock 100 or so MHz faster) and will cost upwards of 50 euro more. | ||
| ||
