Help me, last straw with Vista x64!!!

J

jyi786

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Messages
5,758
Ok guys, I'm not going to start a bashfest; however, I'd like as much critical input as I can get regarding my fight with Vista x64.

I tried so very hard to like Vista. I gave it so many chances, so much time, and divulged plenty of resources (time) to try to get it to work. It just won't do it. For whatever reason, it crashes randomly, and devices just don't want to work. Regardless of what device drivers I choose, OS settings I choose, or what method I use to install them, there is some massive quirk somewhere at RANDOM which is preventing me from liking this OS.

Believe me, there are so many pros to it. For one, I love the speed, and the ability to use all my 6GB of RAM. But what's the point if it crashes randomly on me?

No, my rig is NOT unstable. It's been proven solid at its OC for over a year. None of my devices are defective; I checked all this before I even started installing Vista. It's been working with the same WinXP Pro install for about the same time now (almost a year).

Some of the things I tried:

1. Installing about 20 different Forceware drivers over the span of the installations I did (not in one, and each install was properly conducted, using Driver Cleaner Pro and CCleaner to clean registry prior to installing driver.
2. Installing 3 different sound card drivers.
3. Installing 4 different TV card drivers.
4. Installing Service Pack before/after chipset drivers.
5. Unplugging net so nothing updates before Service Pack gets installed.
6. Clean installs of Vista.

I literally did about 7 clean installs of Vista x64. That's right, CLEAN installs. Built from the ground up. And somewhere along the line, it always manages to screw up. From nVidia purposely crippling drivers (color correction profiling) to my TV card not working at all, the bullshit is endless. It happens all purely randomly. Luckily for me, I am dual booting, so I simply boot right back up into XP, and everything is fine and dandy.

To make sure, I even did a clean install, successfully installed SP1, and then proceeded to do the remainder of the updates online, when, smack in the middle of the online installation, BAM!!! BSOD, and then constantly cycling reboot with the error message "Updates were not configured correctly. Reverting...." :confused::rolleyes: WTF am I supposed to make of that? Clean install was the only option then. :eek:

For the record, my rig was tested 72 hours using Orthos at full load. CPU temp max @ 58C with ambient temp close to 90F + humidity. Memtest on RAM for 72 hours pass with no errors. Video card stress tested with ATI Tool for 72 hours with ambient temps 90F + humidity. Then after all that, I tested them all at once. Orthos+ATI Tool+Windows Memtest for 72 hours again, with temps about 94F + humidity. The system passed with flying colors, so I know for sure the issue is not my rig. As I pointed out, I can switch right back to XP, and everything works perfectly.

I do have a copy of XP Pro 64, and now, more than ever, I think I'm just going to use that instead of Vista x64. What a waste of money, I'm seeing now.

Thanks for any constructive input you can offer.
 
So does your rig run stably under Vista x64 at stock speeds? Did you try to install Vista at stock speeds and then overclock? What about memory times

Don't assume that because an overclock works with XP that it'll work with Vista. I've seen that with my one of my rigs. Vista is a little picker about hardware and overclocking, I don't know if that's bad or good. I think that it can lead to longer term stability but then again maybe its just a PITA.

My sig rig is running solid and its pretty well packed. I've got a web cam, couple of TV tuners, bluetooth transceiver, a Zune, a smartphone, joystick, driving wheel and a bunch of USB external harddrives and the it all works just fine.

I'm sorry for you head aches. But if the hardware is sound and it looks like it is, easing of the overclocks might do the trick. That may not be anything your interested in. I can understand that.

Good luck!
 
All I had to read was it's been overclocked for a year and that was that for me, no need to really read much else. As the poster above said, XP and Vista are two different beasts like it or not, and they do not respond the same way to overclocking. I know it can be the most fucked up unbelievably illogical thing ever, but I've had instances where I couldn't even install a specific OS on a machine that was overclocked even a measly 10% over stock speeds while every other OS I threw at it, including some Linux distros (very particular about timing with those in my experience), and they all ran great - but not the one version of Windows I was attempting to install.

And yes, for the record, it was Vista x64 actually. I did this testing last year on a client's machine and even today I'm still baffled by it. Everything worked with 2K, XP x86, 2K3, and even XP x64 as well as the Linux distros - and even Vista x86 worked. But Vista x64, regardless of the edition I was attempting to install, simply wouldn't even get past the file copy process. Same machine, different OS, same overclock, no luck with Vista x64.

Bleh. Stop overclocking, completely and totally, and see what happens. I don't care if the box has been stable for a year at the overclocked settings - in fact I would say that could be a part of the issues you're having but that's just me. Reset everything to factory defaults, and that means everything including the CMOS itself so the BIOS is factory fresh, set the optical drive for first boot and try to install and get a stable box once again. If successful, fantastic, if not, move on to another OS.

XP x64... superior, I'd say. Has been my OS of choice nearly 3 years now and will be so for many years to come.
 
I run Vista X64 Ultimate on the rig in my sig and it works flawlessly......are you SURE it isn't a driver conflict?

if it BSOD, post it up
 
These men speak truth. You've tried a million different things, you've got nothing to lose by trying this:

  1. Set all clocks and latencies to stock.
  2. Do a fresh reinstallation of Vista with everything at stock.
  3. Use your stuff for a while this way to see if the problem is still there.

Also, MemTest86+ is trash. Left it on overnight with a bad stick of RAM, didn't say a thing. Installing Vista was a BSOD-fest. Took out that stick, everything was fine. Here is a memory tester I've had slightly more luck with.

Finally, check your SATA cables. In 2005 I was having the oddest random lockups and crashes I'd ever seen. Ended up being crappy SATA cables that came with my motherboard.

The majority of people here use Vista daily without any problems or crashes. If it were unstable for all of us as it is for you, we wouldn't use it :). Bear with us and we'll do our best to help you straighten this out.
 
Only thing I've seen that I might have issues with is the recommendation for a Windows-based RAM testing utility which then brings the stability of the OS itself into the equation. The best way to test RAM is outside of any OS "contaminating" the possible results, but I'm just throwing that suggestion out there based on a few decades of experience.

No RAM testing software will be perfect as it's software and inherently can be problematic. Hardware-based chip testing is the preferred methodology but not everyone has access to a $500+ RAM tester. Having said that, there are several different bootable RAM testing applications - in fact, there's one on the Vista DVD itself. Boot off the DVD, click OK, then go into the Repair options and use that one if necessary.

Still, resetting everything to stock and making one final attempt is what I'd do and then move on. I'm going to bet it'll track back to some driver issue because we might not be getting all the info necessary.

No offense to the OP, but testing the same platform with so many different drivers - and I don't care what you think those "driver cleaners" are doing for you, it's simply not going to be done completely and totally. The only true way to know for sure is a clean installation each time - that's where drive imaging software like True Image or Ghost comes in.

Install the OS all by itself and absolutely not one damned thing more - and I mean no driver updates of any kind, nothing from Windows Update (in fact, during the installation process, tell it never to update and get downloads; you can alter that setting later), and once the OS is installed, up and running and operational, make an image of it onto some other drive, partition, or external storage right then and there before proceeding.

Once that's accomplished you can then try the latest most currently available drivers for the specific hardware in question and then do some testing. If those drivers - do this one step at a time, mind you - come up clean, install the next required driver, etc. Always start with the latest chipset drivers, and then install the latest video, then perhaps sound and so on, but the latest chipset drivers really need to be the basis for all further testing.

If things go wrong, something screws up, the BSOD cycle begins anew, just restore the base image (just the OS itself and nothing else) and wham, you're up and running again in a few minutes, ready to try the next set of drivers totally clean without wasting all the time reinstalling the OS normally. Imaging software... can't recommend it nearly enough, especially for troubleshooting like this.

Honestly, I have a difficult time accepting the OP actually spent (or as the case may be, wasted) 12 days worth of time overall doing testing on this machine. 3 days for load testing, 3 days of RAM testing, 3 days of video card testing, and then 3 more days of combined testing? Is the minor overclock and the minor boost in performance really worth all that time, and the probable issues such overclocking might actually be causing even now?

I would have to say nope, it's not worth it, but it remains to be seen based on what results NOT overclocking may give the OP if he's up to the task. With all the work put in so far, a simple reinstall on a non-overclocked box must seem like a single step compared to the massive journey he's been on so far.

My final piece of advice: Get a proper Vista x64 SP1 integrated installation DVD. Installing Vista x64 and then installing the standalone SP1 these days could also be a potential cause for some of the problems. There's nothing better than a proper integrated installation DVD...

The basic gist of this is: what happened before, no matter how stable it was a year ago when it was built, no matter how stable it seems to be right now, it's not the same PC it was last year, nor even the same one turned on yesterday for that matter. People have this mistaken conception that personal computers are static devices, and nothing could be further from the truth.
 
I agree with the others from experience. My machine runs more stable at a higher overclock on XP. My current Q6600 will run Memtest and other things stable at a higher overclock than Vista itself will. I can get at least another 200 Mhz out of it and run Memtest for days. Boot into Vista, BSOD on boot.
 
Wow, lots of things to address. Let me do the best I can here.

heatlesssun said:
So does your rig run stably under Vista x64 at stock speeds?
Click to expand...

This is the first that I've heard anyone say that Vista is more picker with an OC than XP is. It might have some merit, so I'll try it tonight to see if it helps.

YeuEmMaiMai said:
I run Vista X64 Ultimate on the rig in my sig and it works flawlessly......are you SURE it isn't a driver conflict?

if it BSOD, post it up
Click to expand...

MrWizard6600 said:
yeah, post the BSOD.
Click to expand...

I CAN'T. I just can't. It doesn't BSOD all the time, just SOME of the time. Most of the time, the system will hard lock. When I say hard lock, it means everything freezes, period. What you have on the screen at the time is simply frozen, and this is at random No keyboard/mouse input works. The only way is to reset the computer. As a matter of fact, it crashed when I was going to open the Start menu. Before I got there, it froze. :rolleyes:

It's not a driver conflict. After so many clean installs and carefully picking the drivers to install and the order in which to install them, I can safely say it's not drivers.

Joe Average said:
No offense to the OP, but testing the same platform with so many different drivers - and I don't care what you think those "driver cleaners" are doing for you, it's simply not going to be done completely and totally. The only true way to know for sure is a clean installation each time - that's where drive imaging software like True Image or Ghost comes in.
Click to expand...

I understand this. After 15+ years of dealing with this kind of issue, I absolutely concur with what you're saying; thus, as I mentioned, the clean installs.

Joe Average said:
Once that's accomplished you can then try the latest most currently available drivers for the specific hardware in question and then do some testing. If those drivers - do this one step at a time, mind you - come up clean, install the next required driver, etc. Always start with the latest chipset drivers, and then install the latest video, then perhaps sound and so on, but the latest chipset drivers really need to be the basis for all further testing.
Click to expand...

I did exactly that. The first thing I ever installed on the OS was the chipset drivers. Period. Next, video. Test. Next sound card. Test. Next, accessories. Test. Windows Update. Then programs. I mean, during one install, it BSODed during Windows Update for crying out loud. :rolleyes: I've never had something BSOD during Windows Update!

Joe Average said:
Honestly, I have a difficult time accepting the OP actually spent (or as the case may be, wasted) 12 days worth of time overall doing testing on this machine. 3 days for load testing, 3 days of RAM testing, 3 days of video card testing, and then 3 more days of combined testing? Is the minor overclock and the minor boost in performance really worth all that time, and the probable issues such overclocking might actually be causing even now?
Click to expand...

I'm going to take issue with what you said here. I have standards that I adhere to when I'm building my personal rig.

1. I can't vouch for anyone else, but when I buy hardware, I don't trust them. Period. The only way the hardware can "gain" my trust is if it undergos stringent testing for a set period of time. This is the only way I can make sure that the current trend of frequent hardware failure (happens all the time lately, much more so now than in the past) and potential data loss is to be averted at an early stage. Better to fail now than later.
2. Yes, I did in fact do 12 days of full load testing. And I did leave out one part. I always include a small 24 hour period of testing all hardware AT STOCK when I first get it. No better way to stress test hardware than to OC it then leaving it testing in an oven-like environment (think room with no AC). Just ask the [H] how they test their PSUs. If it passes these tests, the hardware is stable in my mind.
3. No, my OC is NOT a minor one by any chance. I've OCed this rig from 2.13GHz to 3.30GHz. Performance is about 1/3 to 2/3 better than it would be at stock. Extra performance is big enough to gauge without using canned benchmarks. Video encoding is about 2x faster. Games are about 20fps faster on average. DAW work is hella fast too. So the notion that my OC is a meager one is absolutely false.

Now, as I stated at the beginning of this post, this is the first I've heard anyone state that Vista x64 is pickier to an OC than any other OS, so I'm going to try it later tonight with the OC backed down. I'm also going to work on getting a copy with SP1 integrated.
 
Just for the record...

My OC carried over from XP to Vista fine. Only quirk is that vista reads my CPU at 3.33Ghz instead of 3Ghz. Doesnt seem to affect stability though.
 
legendz411 said:
Just for the record...

My OC carried over from XP to Vista fine. Only quirk is that vista reads my CPU at 3.33Ghz instead of 3Ghz. Doesnt seem to affect stability though.
Click to expand...

This is precisely what I thought should have happened. It worked fine for every other OS (XP x64 included). :confused:
 
Yea, well, I do not have a brutal OC.

200x10 -> 333x9
RAM at DDR800, (Like a 5/4 divider or w/e)

Aside from the quirkness of the OS reading the speed, it is fine.
 
legendz411 said:
Yea, well, I do not have a brutal OC.
Click to expand...

LOL

I never thought my OC was a brutal one; it's more like "above average". :D

Still, I'm going to back off the OC and install Vista x64 again later this evening. I'm also in the process of getting Vista x64 w/SP1 integrated.
 
We all know what overclocking is, does, and why people do it. The fact of the matter is, we all also know what types of problems it can cause at any given point in time. As I'm lead to believe, by your responses, you have not even TRIED going back to stock speeds. I find it hard to believe a [H] member of over 6 years hasn't thought of the FIRST thing an experienced PC tech would do.

That said, the system will log errors and conflicts. Have you checked the event viewer for signs of errors? Vista's is much more profound than XPs as I have found. Many people seem to overlook this for reasons I do not know. Ever since purchasing Vista Ultimate x64 in late January of 2007, I have not run into a single problem that I have not been able to track down in the event viewer.

Good luck! And if you DO get a BSOD, or any type of error messages at all, please post them up so we may better help you track the source of the problems.
 
gobBobo said:
I find it hard to believe a [H] member of over 6 years hasn't thought of the FIRST thing an experienced PC tech would do.

That said, the system will log errors and conflicts. Have you checked the event viewer for signs of errors? Vista's is much more profound than XPs as I have found. Many people seem to overlook this for reasons I do not know. Ever since purchasing Vista Ultimate x64 in late January of 2007, I have not run into a single problem that I have not been able to track down in the event viewer.
Click to expand...

That's more of my own fault that anything. We'll find out a bit later. My stability testing is so rigorous that once the hardware passes, I can attest that it's basically bulletproof. However, I can tell you it is NOT what I normally do (install OS on an OCed system); this is a deviation from the norm.

The Event Viewer is the first place I look for errors. In this instance, it is of no help. The only "error" it tells me is "Previous system shutdown unexpected." :rolleyes: No shit. And that's after the fact (after the system has already crashed and rebooted).
 
ajm786 said:
The Event Viewer is the first place I look for errors. In this instance, it is of no help. The only "error" it tells me is "Previous system shutdown unexpected." :rolleyes: No shit. And that's after the fact (after the system has already crashed and rebooted).
Click to expand...

Does it provide any type of detailed information, perhaps an event ID # with that message?
 
gobBobo said:
Does it provide any type of detailed information, perhaps an event ID # with that message?
Click to expand...

I think off the top of my head it's Event ID 6008, but don't quote me on that. I'm not sitting in front of the rig to see if that's what it really is. Just something really generic. There's no other error message in the Event Viewer strange or related, so I can't really put my finger on what the issue could be.

Edit: Here's some more info.

The Intel chipset INF drivers that I am using is the 9 series. Perhaps there is an issue with them?

http://vip.asus.com/forum/view.aspx...del=P5K+Deluxe/WiFi-AP&page=1&SLanguage=en-us

Here is the version I've been using:

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/fil...nal+x64+Edition&lang=eng&strOSs=109&submit=Go!

and I guess I can try reverting to the 8.3.1.1009 version here:

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Fil... Professional x64 Edition&lang=eng&sType=prev

Or should I just stick with the INF drivers that Asus specifies as the latest WHQL release (8.3.0.1013) for my motherboard on the P5K Deluxe download page?

http://support.asus.com/download/do...&model=P5K Deluxe/WiFi-AP&type=map&mapindex=2

Thoughts?

Edit 2: Anyone notice on Intel's INF download page how they strangely have nothing listed for any Vista OS? When you try to search for your Vista OS, it comes up with this:

"Download Not Available
This download is no longer available."

Try it:
http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Product_Filter.aspx?ProductID=816
 
Ok, I got a copy of Vista x64 with SP1 integrated. Since that shaves about an hour off the total install time, I guess I'll go ahead and first leave my rig's OC intact, and try switching the INF drivers to a lower one or the one that Asus has WHQL'd for my specific motherboard. If that still does not work, I'll go ahead and do a clean install with the OC backed totally off.
 
Does your motherboard have the ability to save overclocking profiles? I'm unfamiliar with Asus' line of intel based boards, but their AMD boards have had this feature for nearly 2 years.

That approach will save you loads of time man.
 
gobBobo said:
Does your motherboard have the ability to save overclocking profiles? I'm unfamiliar with Asus' line of intel based boards, but their AMD boards have had this feature for nearly 2 years.

That approach will save you loads of time man.
Click to expand...

Thankfully YES. It sure does, and I plan to put it to good use.
 
Yeah, well, I had a 300 baud modem in 1983 that connected to CompuServe at 450 baud because of overclocking some of the timing variables - seriously. For 3 months I was the only person in the US connecting to CIS at 450 baud before they got wind of it and someone "leaked" out the methodology, damned bastiges. Considering I was paying $.10 a minute, and going to 1200 baud would double the cost, it was slick "getting in under the wire," so to speak because CompuServe's dialup racks didn't switch the pricing over at 450 - I still paid $.10 a minute and got 50% more bandwidth.

And believe me, that's a 50% overclock and man, it was fuckin' abso-bloody-lutely visible. Instead of lines of text appearing a word at a time, the entire line just popped onscreen...

Ah, the fun days of computing... I miss 'em. ;)
 
Joe Average said:
Yeah, well, I had a 300 baud modem in 1983 that connected to CompuServe at 450 baud because of overclocking some of the timing variables - seriously. For 3 months I was the only person in the US connecting to CIS at 450 baud before they got wind of it and someone "leaked" out the methodology, damned bastiges. Considering I was paying $.10 a minute, and going to 1200 baud would double the cost, it was slick "getting in under the wire," so to speak because CompuServe's dialup racks didn't switch the pricing over at 450 - I still paid $.10 a minute and got 50% more bandwidth.

And believe me, that's a 50% overclock and man, it was fuckin' abso-bloody-lutely visible. Instead of lines of text appearing a word at a time, the entire line just popped onscreen...

Ah, the fun days of computing... I miss 'em. ;)
Click to expand...

Aaah yes. The good old days of CompuServe and Prodigy. How could I forget those. :p

Back on topic. Did you look into the Intel INF issue I posted on the previous page? I still wonder why Intel doesn't have anything listed for any Vista OS, if you choose it from their dropdown list.
 
WinTV HVR-1800-MCE

There is your problem. Hauppauge's drivers don't work right with 4+GB of ram and will completely trash the system. You can try all the drivers you want, last time I checked, they all had the problem.

Pull the WinTV card out of the system and see if it works. I had to get rid of my card and go to a different brand to get it working in Vista x64 with my 8gb ram.
 
Not sure, but I'd suggest checking your browser's settings. If you're running anything like NoScript for Firefox, that may have a drastic effect on the menu systems at places like Intel. I just went to support.intel.com and I see everything, no issues.

Of course, I had to check NoScript to make sure Intel.com was allowed to see the actual menu and listed content. :p
 
gobBobo said:
Upon selecting "Windows Vista 64" instead of one of the specific OSs, I got these results:
http://downloadcenter.intel.com/fil...ndows+Vista*+64&lang=eng&strOSs=150&submit=Go!
Click to expand...

Weird. I just tried it right now and it says Download not available. :confused:

brom42 said:
WinTV HVR-1800-MCE

There is your problem. Hauppauge's drivers don't work right with 4+GB of ram and will completely trash the system. You can try all the drivers you want, last time I checked, they all had the problem.

Pull the WinTV card out of the system and see if it works. I had to get rid of my card and go to a different brand to get it working in Vista x64 with my 8gb ram.
Click to expand...

I thought that was the problem, but it isn't. Hauppauge did release a driver that corrected these such issues. Plus, they have an obscure (beta) driver CD that they are offering on their forums, which I did use. Even when I didn't install any drivers for the Hauppauge card, I STILL had problems. So I know it's not the TV card.
 
Are you selecting Vista Ultimate 64? I got the same results as you with that one. Choosing "Windows Vista 64" gave me the results.

Does that link I posted say download not available?
 
gobBobo said:
Are you selecting Vista Ultimate 64? I got the same results as you with that one. Choosing "Windows Vista 64" gave me the results.

Does that link I posted say download not available?
Click to expand...

Yes. Pretty much any Vista flavor I try says "Download no longer available." The direct link you posted works; I know it because I already posted that in one of my previous posts.

But when you go to Google, for instance, and type "intel inf driver", the first hit that comes up is Intel's main download page. When it asks you for the OS you are running and you choose it, it says "Download no longer available."
 
gobBobo said:
Open this: http://downloadcenter.intel.com/T8C...xe&agr=N&ProductID=816&DwnldID=16023&lang=eng

If that doesn't work, select any of the choices, even XP if you have to. The description says that it's the same driver for ALL windows versions.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I was using to get to the software all this time.

So, going back to what I asked earlier, do you think there is a possibility that the newer INF drivers might be causing instability, and that I should revert to an earlier one to see if that helps the issue?
 
I don't think I saw anyone mentioning using prime95 to assure stability once the OS is installed. From everything I have seen, it's a better tester than Orthos. Let it run overnight and see what happens. I had an overclocked Athlon XP system one time that was rock-solid...until I started playing the Kursk map on Battlefield 1942. It would crash at almost the exact same spot every time. It never crashed on any other app no matter how hard I ran it. Then I ran prime, and sure enough, after about an hour, it popped up a miscalculation. In my case it was a RAM timing, but your case may be different. Prime95 is a worthy ally in helping you find the problem.
 
There is always the possibility. I cannot comment on personal experience with any type of Intel chipset drivers. I've never worked with boards with Intel chipsets that my OS didn't have working, stable drivers included already. My apologies for the confusion.
 
mystykmax said:
I don't think I saw anyone mentioning using prime95 to assure stability once the OS is installed. From everything I have seen, it's a better tester than Orthos. Let it run overnight and see what happens. I had an overclocked Athlon XP system one time that was rock-solid...until I started playing the Kursk map on Battlefield 1942. It would crash at almost the exact same spot every time. It never crashed on any other app no matter how hard I ran it. Then I ran prime, and sure enough, after about an hour, it popped up a miscalculation. In my case it was a RAM timing, but your case may be different. Prime95 is a worthy ally in helping you find the problem.
Click to expand...

I did this too. At some point after I ran Orthos, I was getting some crashing (when STALKER came out), and I thought it was my rig, since it was still new. So, off to 12 hours of Prime95. No errors. At that time, turned out the cause of all the crashing was STALKER all along (STALKER is STILL known today to be pretty unstable).
 
ajm786 said:
I thought that was the problem, but it isn't. Hauppauge did release a driver that corrected these such issues. Plus, they have an obscure (beta) driver CD that they are offering on their forums, which I did use. Even when I didn't install any drivers for the Hauppauge card, I STILL had problems. So I know it's not the TV card.
Click to expand...

Link to obscure beta driver CD please. :D I still have my WinTV card and all of my systems are subject to the driver problem. I would love to throw that card in one of my machines.
 
It could be the memory, i built a Vista Media Center just before christmas and every now and again it would lockup, sometimes it could do it 20mins into a movie, sometimes after having movies on repeat for 12+hours. I memtested it for a week without any stoppage and also ran it on/off for a few hours when initially trying to diagnose the issue. I also ran prime for 3-4 days again with no interuptions. The machine was not oc'd, but would simply just hardlock whilst watching media.

After tearing my hair out for almost 6weeks, i finally swapped the memory with the one in my computer (exactly the same timings/manufacter) and its been fine since and so has my computer.
 
Your refusal to not set your system back to stock is not helping the situation. Set it back to stock and reinstall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top