Gateway FX 6800-01e BIOS Update from Gateway Unsupported

[Guest]

As long as the individual core temps are around 42°C each you should be OK.

I would shut the system down, inspect it for dust and clean it out with an air compressor or a can of compressed air.

One thing, make sure that there is adequate airflow around the system. You don't want the system to be in a restrictive air flow space as this can cause heating issues.

Leaving the Hotswap bay door will can help to keep the system a little bit cooler.

Upgrading the rear fan to a more powerful fan of the same size and an 80mm fan to the inside of the front will help too. You can also add another fan to draw heat away from the memory and at the same time, to help blow out the heat from the video card.

Or instead of adding more fans, you could go with a good liquid cooling system. Just be careful as some of the cheaper stuff can leak.

 

[Guest]

just wanted to say that i have had big problems with this computer,fx6800-01e.I may have gotten something straight after a ton of problems.When I flashed the bios I got a error when I checked off the boxes in setup and barely got back to bios setup.After multiple trys of flashing bios every way and still getting cksum errors the only way i got it to actually flash ,I THINK is to check all boxes on left in setup and then load optimal and restart and it flashed and showed rewriting all the bios,instead of a smaller files as it did the first five times I TRIED.THE computer restarted and only then in system properties was the bios version ami r01-a4 2-11-09.I assume that that unlocked tne turboboost.At least it seems stable.I have replaced power supply with 850 watt black widow and added three more gigs of ram and also have another 4850 card running in crossfire.But with the flashing cursor problem and the bios fiasco and the pci slots being to close together this mother board is basically the week link in this system.Thanks for this post as it may have helped me and others with this system.

 

[chetwynd]

I think that Gateway has gone way down in support and will probably never buy one of their units again. I might even take my unit back to Costco before my 3 months are up. I installed Ubuntu (Linux) as a separate partition and OS but my Vista 64 system seemed to have slowed down.

When I flashed the Bios the system came up with a CMOS checksum error and then I had the option to load the default settings or enter the bios every time I boot up now. Then the computer seems to work properly. The Bios Version/Date is: AMI RO1-A4, 2/11/2009.

I am wondering if I have to restore my old Bios to make things work properly again and then remove the other OS?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

chet

 

[chetwynd]

I flashed to BIOS Version/Date: AMI R01-A4, 2/11/2009.

I am not happy with the results because the new Bios is giving me a CMOS checksum error every time I start the computer. I have to sellect between entering the bios or restoring the default settings every time.

I don't know if the problem is due to the new Bios or that I have a dual OS using Ubuntu (Linux) on a separate partition. The system boots up using Vista if I don't sellect Ubuntu.

The system seemed to have slowed down ever since I installed Ubuntu. Is this a normal result when one has 2 OS?

Any help with these problems would be greatly appreciated.

chet

 

[udaman]

I saved my original Bios from my Gateway FX6800-07h computer and flashed to BIOS Version/Date: AMI R01-A4, 2/11/2009. If you would like the original Bios just email me at chetwynd50@gmail.com and I can send it to you.

I am not happy with the results because the new Bios is giving me a CMOS checksum error every time I start the computer. I have to sellect between entering the bios or restoring the default settings every time.

I don't know if the problem is due to the new Bios or that I have a dual OS using Ubuntu (Linux) on a separate partition. The system boots up using Vista if I don't sellect Ubuntu.

The system seemed to have slowed down ever since I installed Ubuntu. Is this a normal result when one has 2 OS?

Any help with these problems would be greatly appreciated.

chet

Probably, you already read many people has the same CMOS checksum error in this thread. I am one of the luck people who don't have this problem because of the following suggestion. I strongly don't believe that having another OS (Ubuntu) made your system slower.

I did finally get this bios upgrade to work correctly. I followed a couple of suggestions from this post.

First I followed this process as instructed by Renegade_Warrior :

Downloaded the Bios upgrade and made sure all the files were in the same directory.

Right clicked on AFUWIN and selected run as administator as instructed by rdk2009

Make sure your system is disconnected, the Anti-Virus is disabled, then
select Start > Run and browse to the folder where the files are and select AFUWIN.EXE Then hit - Open

You will see a Dialog Window pop up with three tabs, Select the Setup tab.

Under Block Options, you'll want to select the following.

- Program All Blocks
- Boot Block

Under CMOS Options Select - Load ROM File's Optimal

Under Miscellaneous Select

- Do Not Check ROM ID
- Restart After Programming

Next Click Open and select the ROM file - 842P161G.ROM

Click the Flash button and let it do it's job.

DO NOT Touch anything until it finishes.

On restart I had to manually go into boot options and reselect my primary boot drive. Before I did that I booted to a blank screen so this information was somehow erased. After that the computer restarted normally but the system hade to automatically reinstall the I/O drivers. This happened automatically with no effort on my part. The bios showed the correct update and a CPU speed of 2.79 up from 2.67. I never did get a checksum error as many have stated. But did have to reset my primary bootdrive info.

 

[chetwynd]

Thank you for the CMOS error correction posts. I got it corrected by keeping all 5 files in 1 folder and right clicking on the .EXE file and running it as the Administrator (which I forgot to do while cursing in the past). Checking all the boxes (that disapear after you sellect the ROM file to be flashed) has to be rechecked. Making sure nothing is running and disconnect from the network.

Thank you all for your great suggestions that helped a lot.

Gateway service sucks - This is my last conversation with them - I found the solution myself on the Intel site where they suggested resetting the power management modes that interfere with the speed detection.

"I bought this my FX6800 from Costco and fount that the processor is running at 1.59 GHz instead of the 2.67 GHz it’s supposed to run at. Please tell me what I can do about getting the unit to perform up to specs." was submitted by J to the problem analysis engine.

30 Aug 2009 11:14:48 AM Phone Number set to
30 Aug 2009 11:14:52 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 created an incident named J.
30 Aug 2009 11:14:57 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Welcome to Gateway Chat. My name and badge number are Dhilipan_GWSI838. I am looking at your account and the information you submitted. I will begin troubleshooting with you in just a moment.
30 Aug 2009 11:16:41 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Thank you for being online. I appreciate your patience.
30 Aug 2009 11:16:59 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: May I confirm with your computer serial number is XXXXXXX?
30 Aug 2009 11:17:53 AM J says: I will have to take the unit back if we can't get this unit to perform to spec. The unit was bought as FX6800-07h but System info states its a FX6800-01e.
30 Aug 2009 11:18:02 AM J says: Yes the Ser # is correct
30 Aug 2009 11:20:04 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Thank you for the confirmation.
30 Aug 2009 11:21:19 AM J says: The Intel Processor ID Utility gave me the above information. The system does not seem to be any faster than my 10 year old P4 2.4 GHz computer with 1.5 GB Ram and a cheap $100.00 video card.
30 Aug 2009 11:22:57 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Could you explain the issue briefly?
30 Aug 2009 11:25:59 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Are we still connected?
30 Aug 2009 11:26:06 AM J says: This computer does not seem to be any faster in any way than my 10 year old Intel P4 2.4 GHz computer with 1.5 GB of RAM and a cheap $100.00 video card. The Intel Processor ID Utility shows that the expected GHz is supposed to be 2.67 but the actual GHz is 1.59 and the unit was bought as FX6800-07h but System Info shows it to be FX6800-01e.
30 Aug 2009 11:26:59 AM J says: Can you tell me why this discrepancy?
30 Aug 2009 11:30:35 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Could you stay on the line for two minutes while I check it for you?
30 Aug 2009 11:30:49 AM J says: yes
30 Aug 2009 11:32:58 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Thank you for being online.
30 Aug 2009 11:33:31 AM Joe Tody says: Still here - waiting for answers!
30 Aug 2009 11:35:25 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: If my understanding is correct, your new computer is running slow,am I right?
30 Aug 2009 11:35:38 AM J says: yes
30 Aug 2009 11:36:00 AM J says: and it seems to be not the unit I paid for.
30 Aug 2009 11:36:45 AM J says: what is the difference between the FX6800-07h and the FX6800-01e?
30 Aug 2009 11:38:59 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Based upon the process the speed is different.
30 Aug 2009 11:40:38 AM J says: my Expected speed is 2.67 GHz and my actual speed is 1.59 GHz according to the Itel Processor ID Utility.
30 Aug 2009 11:41:19 AM J says: If there is something wrong with this CPU - what is the process for returning the product for repair to Gateway in the Vancouver BC area?
30 Aug 2009 11:41:54 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: You can find the specification in the gateway website.
30 Aug 2009 11:43:18 AM J says: Do you know why my computer's speed is so radically different than what it's supposed to be?
30 Aug 2009 11:43:49 AM J says: Do you have any test that I can do to confirm these results?
30 Aug 2009 11:44:39 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Computer speed is depend upon the processor.
30 Aug 2009 11:45:31 AM J says: Please tell me what processor came with the FX6800-07h and which one came with the FX6800-01e?
30 Aug 2009 11:46:23 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: The specification is listed in the gateway website.
30 Aug 2009 11:47:36 AM J says: are you able to help me with my problem or not?
30 Aug 2009 11:49:06 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: The specification of both the computers are listed.
30 Aug 2009 11:49:09 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Processor1 Intel® Core™ i7 processor Chipset Intel X58 Express
30 Aug 2009 11:50:28 AM J says: what do you suggest for me to do in order to get the computer to work according to specs?
30 Aug 2009 11:52:29 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Both are same model only and both are having thwe same specifications. There is no difference between the processors and chipset
30 Aug 2009 11:53:35 AM J says: Again - What do you suggest for me to do to get this computer working to specifications?
30 Aug 2009 11:54:41 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: It may be soft wares installed in your computer please check it.
30 Aug 2009 11:54:58 AM J says: how?
30 Aug 2009 11:55:40 AM J says: The processor speed is over 1.0 GHz slower than its supposed to be.
30 Aug 2009 11:55:50 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: I am sorry am I not aware for that.
30 Aug 2009 11:57:02 AM J says: As I stated before - The Intel Processor ID Utility shows my speed to be 1.59 GHz and the Expected speed is supposed to be 2.67 GHz.
30 Aug 2009 11:58:59 AM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: I will provide the Answer By Gateway number please contact them to resolve the issue.
30 Aug 2009 11:59:30 AM J says: Is this a common problem with this unit? If so - Where do I send it for repair?
30 Aug 2009 12:01:12 PM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Joe, please delete the unwanted files from your computer and check. If the issue persists please contact us we are ready to help you.
30 Aug 2009 12:03:03 PM J says: What makes you think that this is a software problem. don
30 Aug 2009 12:03:33 PM J says: Don't you have any way of testing this computer to verify that there is something physically wrong with it?
30 Aug 2009 12:04:02 PM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: No there is no physically wrong in it.
30 Aug 2009 12:05:15 PM Dhilipan_GWSI838 says: Basically both are having the same specifications. If you have still doubt please contact any local technician to resolve your issue.
30 Aug 2009 12:05:52 PM J says: I will keep this log and post it on a website to show what kind of a response Gateway has for their customer. Thxs for your help

 

[udaman]

Wow! What kind of support was that? Their response was non sense!

 

[dr m]

Had the same problem , twas the power saving feature in control panel in vista saving energy by running at half speed
making no sense what so ever ..................????????????

 

[udaman]

Just make sure you do not get Windows 7 from a Torrent as you stand a good chance of getting a load of pre-installed malware with it.

If you get a TechNet Plus license, you can get Windows 7 RTM (no expiration) along with other software and access to TechNet resources.

Code TMSAM10 still works. Used it last week and got $86.00 off (not counting tax)

I plan to use TechNet to update my skills while my daughter is in school this year.

The promotion code still works. How is your gateway system running? Thanks!

 

[Guest]

So far, so good

The biggest lesson I learned from buying this gateway system was to never buy anything produced by Acer ever though it may bear another company name.

I should have stuck to building systems as I used to do.

Instead, I've gotten into customizing my KJ Jeep. 😀

 

[CaptainHeadwound]

Renegade,

I have been trying to get my FX 6800-01e Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit install to recognize a "RAID Controller" that says there is no driver installed for the I/O Hub PCI Express Root Port 1 -3408. Any idea what this is? I have downloaded the latest 64 bit driver from Intel and installed them. Still says it cannot install driver.

So far, so good

The biggest lesson I learned from buying this gateway system was to never buy anything produced by Acer ever though it may bear another company name.

I should have stuck to building systems as I used to do.

Instead, I've gotten into customizing my KJ Jeep. 😀

 

[Guest]

Did you do a clean install or an upgrade?

That would be Intel(R) 5520/5500/X58 I/O Hub PCI Express Root Port 1 - 3408

The Raid driver you want to look for is Intel® Matrix Storage Manager v 8.9.0.1023

This is the latest driver released 7/17/2009

 

[CaptainHeadwound]

Clean Install ...I tried manually loading the newest drivers from Intel for that device after unzipping the INF package. Had to keep trying until it finally took a ACHI driver..then blue screened. Install is now killed and will not boot. I am going to nuke it(format) and do another install. Did you use F6 to load drivers during install...or just let Win 7 use default drivers and then install Matrix Storage after first boot? I really want to use RAID for my 2 Western Digital Cavier Black drives in the 2 hot swap caddies in the front. Should I be trying to just mount these 2 drives internally and leave the bays open? Could that be the issue?

Thanks buddy!

Did you do a clean install or an upgrade?

That would be Intel(R) 5520/5500/X58 I/O Hub PCI Express Root Port 1 - 3408

The Raid driver you want to look for is Intel® Matrix Storage Manager v 8.9.0.1023

This is the latest driver released 7/17/2009

 

[Guest]

Sorry to take so long, was at a neighbor's helping out with a system.

I did a clean install here too and I let Windows 7 take care of everything. Installed the Intel Matrix Manager Storage Manager after the install was finished.

As for the drives in the Hot Swap bay, I didn't insert the drives until after the driver Storage Manager was installed.

Maybe the UAC might be interfering with the install?

 

[CaptainHeadwound]

Are you using the Hot Swap bay for your RAID boot drive? That is what I was attempting to do.

Sorry to take so long, was at a neighbor's helping out with a system.

I did a clean install here too and I let Windows 7 take care of everything. Installed the Intel Matrix Manager Storage Manager after the install was finished.

As for the drives in the Hot Swap bay, I didn't insert the drives until after the driver Storage Manager was installed.

Maybe the UAC might be interfering with the install?

 

[Guest]

Not doing RAID, but I am using it for hot swapping.

If you try to insert a drive in the front bay without the Intel Storage Manager installed, then the system will crash, or at least it used to in Vista.

But with the Storage Manager installed, it should automatically detect the drive. If not, then just open the program and click Actions > Rescan for Plug and Play Devices

Matter of fact, it's been a long morning, I should have thought of this earlier.

The front bay uses the same controller as the main hard drive (Operating system drive). So you'll need to configure RAID in the system BIOS for the drives.

You'll just need to be careful of which drives you configure as Gateway wasn't very careful of which bays they connected to which drive connector.

When you open your case and you look at your SATA connectors, it'll be like this:

SATA-5 SATA-3 SATA-1
SATA-6 SATA-4 SATA-2

5 & 6 will be towards the bottom of the case
with 6, 4 and 2 against the motherboard.

 

[CaptainHeadwound]

Format and fresh Clean install, everything is working but still have the dreaded Raid Controller (code 28) missing driver. My Windows Experience score is also taking a hit from all mid 7"s down to 5.9 due to RAM and Hard Disk Read. Maybe Windows 7 is just not meant to run on this X58 Gateway motherboard? Any other ideas...anybody?

Thanks for helping out...really has me stumped!

Not doing RAID, but I am using it for hot swapping.

If you try to insert a drive in the front bay without the Intel Storage Manager installed, then the system will crash, or at least it used to in Vista.

But with the Storage Manager installed, it should automatically detect the drive. If not, then just open the program and click Actions > Rescan for Plug and Play Devices

Matter of fact, it's been a long morning, I should have thought of this earlier.

The front bay uses the same controller as the main hard drive (Operating system drive). So you'll need to configure RAID in the system BIOS for the drives.

You'll just need to be careful of which drives you configure as Gateway wasn't very careful of which bays they connected to which drive connector.

When you open your case and you look at your SATA connectors, it'll be like this:

SATA-5 SATA-3 SATA-1
SATA-6 SATA-4 SATA-2

5 & 6 will be towards the bottom of the case
with 6, 4 and 2 against the motherboard.

 

[Guest]

This has me a bit puzzled too as my installation ran flawlessly.

Then again, I've yet to do a fresh install when my Retail package comes in on the 22nd.

You might want to check back earlier in this thread for BIOS settings I had previously posted and check your settings on the off chance that there might be something there causing this problem???

Or if possibly there might be something loose in the case such as a connector?

The driver should have installed. :scratches head:

 

[CaptainHeadwound]

This is definitely weird. No issues doing a non-RAID install as it uses the controller with a different driver. It's running ok and I'm going to load software and see if I can crank out some Crysis and Battlefield 2 on it. I'll post results...or failure! Looking forward to throwing my Windows 7 Launch party on the 22nd if it stays stable. Sager laptop gets the treatment next!

This has me a bit puzzled too as my installation ran flawlessly.

Then again, I've yet to do a fresh install when my Retail package comes in on the 22nd.

You might want to check back earlier in this thread for BIOS settings I had previously posted and check your settings on the off chance that there might be something there causing this problem???

Or if possibly there might be something loose in the case such as a connector?

The driver should have installed. :scratches head:

 

[Guest]

-=< Good Luck >=-

 

[corby]

Has anyone experienced a change in their graphics link width after updating their bios. CPU-Z reports that my comp has a link width of x4 while it should be x16. My card is in the first slot and I even pulled it and re-seated it. Below is a report from CPU-Z of my comp on the left and a similar on the right. The only difference is I have the new bios and the other has the old.

If anyone else has this problem or can explain it or fix it, it would be appreciated.

http://entertainment.webshots.com/photo/2893206630028868839uFxrTK

 

[Guest]

Just checked mine and it is reporting x16

Are you running the 64-bit version of CPU-Z?

 

[corby]

Yes, 64 bit. Just to be sure I just downloaded the 64 zip file and got the same result as the 32/64 setup file that has both binaries.
Still have the same result.

It does report a max supported value of x16 but it is only using x4. That is a quarter of what it should do.

Thanks for checking your system. Something is screwey somewhere. Could it be the graphics card? The only change I made to the system was to replace the original HD that failed and put in a 1T drive. Of course I had to reload everything to the new drive.

 

[Guest]

Are you running the newest ATI Catalyst Drivers?

ATI Catalyst™ 9.9 Suite for Windows 7 (64 bit)

 

[corby]

I'm running Vista 64bit with the latest drivers. I have attached results of GPU-z. It also reports x4. If you see anything strange in attachment let me know.

http://community.webshots.com/album/570652106CjlCIr

I also checked the bios and set to "optimal defaults" with same result. Can't do very much in bios.