Quantcast

Maximum PC

It is currently Thu Dec 18, 2014 10:54 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Blizzard....and Error #132
PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:34 pm 
Thoroughbred
Thoroughbred

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:03 am
Posts: 1943
Ok, Blizzard's been spitting some BS lately, telling us to UNDERCLOCK our systems so we can play World of Warcraft.

Check out this thread:

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/threa ... 353364&P=1

Yep. They're actually telling us to underclock our non-overclocked systems in order to play the damn game because if we don't the game would just crash 5 seconds into the game. We paid $50 for this game and $15 every month after that.

Here's a quote from the forums from their tech guy:

Quote:
The logical error being made is to assume that errors specific to certain hardware combinations can in fact be fixed with changes from our end. In many cases they cannot.

A poster brought up the 1.5.1 patch that removed a faulty assert statement from the Mac build. The details of that patch are that there was a memory leak that was being detected and causing the app to quit (usually in Battlegrounds). This bug was affecting all Mac players and the fix was straightforward. The second part of that story is that the same memory leak was happening on the PC build, only it was not being reported and the game was able to keep running. This was a clear cut coding bug, the bug affected *all* users in some form (asserting on the Mac, and leaking RAM on the PC), and *all* users benefited from the fix in 1.5.1.

OK, now what about 132.

We have looked really closely at the dumps being sent in. And we have seen some really interesting correlations in that the type of error popping up is often (not always, but often) by people running the exact same combination of processor and motherboard. And in some of those cases, the user was able to make a minor tweak to their memory timing settings (or simply stop overclocking) and the 132 issue went away. I'm not advocating that you do this - our policy is not to recommend BIOS setting changes unless totally neceessary - but I can report what we have been told by users.

I have to make this super clear because this is the consensus among the majority of the programming staff: any problem that stops happening when the memory timing or processor clocking is reduced, is in all likelihood an indication of a system integrity problem, not of a bug in the game code. Bugs in game code tend to take the form described above in the 1.5.1 discussion, they are often very clear cut and affect all users. Problems occurring only on (say) AMD Athlon-XP processors on Asus A7N8X motherboards with DDR400 RAM, are generally *not* the kinds of bugs that have any fix possible in game code.

Example from this week - we look at the crash dump coming back from a user (actually several different users which makes this even more interesting). We see the processor crashed while trying to access an illegal address in RAM. The code at that point in the game and the dumped state of the registers shows that - had the CPU been operating correctly - it would have calculated a valid address, a simple sum of two values, the original value still sitting in one CPU register and the add-in value being part of the instruction stream.

We can see that the CPU register has a valid value, and that the code wanted to add a small offset to it and store the result in another register - when we examine the second register in the crash dump we see that the addition result is incorrect! We have seen this same class of failure on a handful of separate machines now, and they all had the same type of hardware.

This is the kind of situation that inevitably leads us to suspect some class of system integrity problem - either thermal, or power, timing / overclocking, or a BIOS bug. There really is no way on earth to defend against faulty processor behavior in software.

In some cases there has been a BIOS bug causing memory timing to be improperly set at boot time, and leading to faulty instructions being fed to the CPU. Bluntly when we see the CPU asked to add 500 to 1000 and it comes up with 8,001,500... it is a pretty plain indicator that a bad bit was passed from RAM to CPU, or that the CPU is operating outside of its rated speed limit, or the user is having a power or thermal problem leading to faulty chip operation. It really only takes a single bad bit or calculation like this to give you a #132 error.

With all that said, why don't each of you just post a few lines of basic system info - motherboard, CPU type and speed, RAM type and amount, and so on. (not a full DXDIAG post).

Please don't be angry at us when we discover that not all machines out there are running perfectly. Take a closer look at your settings and be willing to experiment - others have, and solved some of these types of problems.


Take note that all was OK before they added in a patch last Tuesday. How come all these problems surfaced AFTER the patch? We've never had any problems before the damn patch. And now they're telling us it's OUR fault?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:04 pm 
King of All Voodoo2 Cards
King of All Voodoo2 Cards
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 10:41 am
Posts: 9316
Ahahahahaha!!!!

Everyone is out paying to beta test WoW


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:48 pm 
Thoroughbred
Thoroughbred

Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 8:03 am
Posts: 1943
Flytrap7 wrote:
Ahahahahaha!!!!

Everyone is out paying to beta test WoW


EXACTLY!!!

So many bugs. Soooo many bugs.

And paladin class....they need to fix that. I got a lvl 60 pally and I gotta minimize WoW and browse some forums cause they take forever to kill anything.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:29 pm 
Thunderbird
Thunderbird

Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 5:58 pm
Posts: 773
Location: Mount Prospect, IL
Which is why I've stopped playing MMORP's. It seems every game almost is in a Beta test.
If I could get a new computer and if I wanted an online game now, the only game I'd maybe mest with is CS. At least it's somewhat fair, and I get my enjoyment from competing against others.

If someone could make a MMORP with completely defined rules that would not changed and was Beta tested BEFORE hand with no changes after, I'd feel better about it.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 4:50 pm 
King of All Voodoo2 Cards
King of All Voodoo2 Cards
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 10:41 am
Posts: 9316
Guide Wars, jigga


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:11 pm 
Team Member
Team Member

Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:58 pm
Posts: 332
Location: Ottawa Ontario
Did you ever think that the battlegrounds patch accessed different areas of your hardware then the regular game? Didn't think you did.


Top
  Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

© 2014 Future US, Inc. All rights reserved.